Morrisons Brentford Parking Fine

[Giraffe]

I received a letter in the post today with pictures of my car entering and leaving Morrisons in Brentford. I parked there for our away game. Apparently there are signs saying that parking is restricted to 120 minutes for customer use ony. However neither me or my son saw any of these signs. The bastards are charging me £75 for the privilege of using their f***ing car park.

I recall seeing other Brighton fans in the car park and in fact in one picture there is someone walking by my car in their Brighton yellow and blue shirt!! Anyone else got caught by this?

 

[ChapManiA]

I wonder how water tight their £75 charge is. Couldn't you claim that you left the car park with your vehicle, then came back later as you'd forgotten to buy milk.

Do they have any legal backing, or are they just hoping people cough up without give it a second thought?

 

[Lady Whistledown]

To be honest, I'd have thought this is pretty standard for any supermarket, especially one within walking distance of a football ground, otherwise half the crowd at every game would use it.

It'll be a condition of use of their private car park, therefore they can impose any regulations they see fit, I imagine.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I wonder how water tight their £75 charge is. Couldn't you claim that you left the car park with your vehicle, then came back later as you'd forgotten to buy milk.

If they've sent pictures of your car entering and leaving, the chances are it's been taken off some kind of number plate recognition camera, and they can tell exactly when you entered and left. Therefore you won't be able to try the line about leaving and coming back. Besides, there's usually a condition of "no return within xx hours" attached anyway.

These things are increasingly common- I've known taxi drivers at Gatwick pop into the McDonalds car park to avoid paying parking charges elsewhere, fall asleep and overstay the 60 minute waiting time, not realising there was a problem until they received a fine in the post a few weeks later.

 

[little al]

Its a con, don't pay it. Have a read through this.
Retail Park Charge - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums

 

[Stoo82]

Its a con, don't pay it. Have a read through this.
Retail Park Charge - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums

A quote from that forum:

Tickets only have to be paid if they are issued by a council or the police.
So just ignore, ignore, ignore.

Don't know if this is true though.

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

Had the same thing in Chester a while back...chuck it in the bin and forget about it.

 

[Lady Whistledown]

I wonder if they'd really bother going to the effort of the courts just to retrieve a £75 fine?

 

[little al]

A quote from that forum:



Don't know if this is true though.

Don't even respond to the letter. Just throw it, and any follow up letters in the bin.
You could have a read through some of these threads too.

FightBack Forums -> Parking and Decriminalised Notices

 

[Giraffe]

I wonder if they'd really bother going to the effort of the courts just to retrieve a £75 fine?

My worry is if I ignore it they will then increase the fine and then increase it again and then perhaps go for a CCJ without my knowledge.

 

[gullshark]

If they bother you with more letters, simply tell them that their grievance is with the DRIVER and not the owner of the vehicle and you don't have to reveal who was driving at the time.

 

[little al]

I wonder if they'd really bother going to the effort of the courts just to retrieve a £75 fine?

They won't because they can't, its not a fine, its an invoice.


Judge quashes £300 parking fine...because it set out to ‘frighten and intimidate’ driver
Last updated at 23:37pm on 23.03.08
Add your view

Car park operators could be forced to stop threatening motorists with huge penalty charges after a landmark court ruling.
In a decision that will be welcomed by many aggrieved drivers, a judge has ruled that the demands for hundreds of pounds in penalties which a parking company sent to one woman driver were illegal because they were too high.
The court was told they were intended to "frighten or intimidate" her rather than compensate the firm for any lost income.
The case is expected to have far-reaching implications for private parking firms.
Labour MP Alan Meale, who has campaigned on behalf of motorists, said: "This ruling gives hope that people who have had money taken from them wrongly by parking companies may be able to recover it."
Scroll down for more....

A judge has quashed a series of fines Victoria Hetherington-Jakeman received for allegedly parking her car at a shopping centre for more than two hours


Warning sign: No tickets were left on the windscreen of Ms Hetherington-Jakeman's car at Thornton Retail Park

And the woman's solicitor, Martin Lee, said: "In future, companies that charge these sorts of sums will have them struck out unless they can prove that they are a proper account of any financial loss.
"The courts have shown that unfairly high bank charges are a penalty charge and therefore unjustifiable. The same principle applies here."
In a ground-breaking decision, the judge quashed a series of £100 demands sent to Victoria Hetherington-Jakeman, who had allegedly left her car at a shopping centre for more than the permitted two hours.
She was sued by Excel Parking Services, which is run by a man once acquitted of demanding money with menaces from the owners of clamped cars and who is allowed electronic access to the Government's database of 38million motorists – despite being temporarily barred last year following scores of complaints about its behaviour.
Ms Hetherington-Jakeman, 60, was sued for failing to pay three £60 parking tickets which she did not even know she had been given.
Her visits to the Portland Retail Park near her home in Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, took place between September and November 2006.
But no tickets were left on the windscreen of her Mercedes and she heard nothing from Excel until the following January when she was sent a bill for £300, followed by letters from bailiffs threatening to confiscate her property unless she paid up.

Excel boss Simon Renshaw-Smith manages a number of parking stations

Excel had used a fixed camera to record her numberplate as she entered and left the site. It then passed the details to the DVLA, which sent back an email with her name and address.
Mr Lee told Mansfield County Court that the levy of £100 per offence was an "unlawful penalty clause" intended to "frighten or intimidate" and therefore unenforceable.
This argument was accepted by District Judge Wall, who ruled that the fines did not have to be paid.
Last night, Ms Hetherington-Jakeman, who is head of quality control at a printing firm, said she was relieved her 14-month battle was over.
"Excel's behaviour has been absolutely disgraceful throughout. When I tried to contact them – and the only way to do that was on a 50p-a-minute premium-rate phone line – I got no response. They said they couldn't discuss the matter.
"They couldn't even get the most basic details right. First, they said my car was black, then silver. It's white.
"They claimed the initial £60 parking tickets hadn't arrived because of a hold-up at the Royal Mail, though the Post Office said that wasn't true.
"It's been very stressful but at least we have got the judgment we wanted."
Excel, which manages a number of hospital, retail and station car parks, is run from an office in Sheffield by Simon Renshaw-Smith, 41, who is also director of a wheel-clamping firm called Captain Clampit Ltd.
In 1993 he was accused at Sheffield magistrates' court of demanding £145 with menaces from two drivers whose cars he had immobilised.
Asked last night about the case, Mr Renshaw-Smith said: "The accusations against me were dropped. I was acquitted."
Last July, Excel was finally removed from the "approved" list of organisations allowed electronic access to the DVLA's database.
It followed complaints from around the country and the formation of a 100-strong action group in Mansfield made up entirely of motorists who claimed they had been unfairly treated by Excel.
The move meant that Excel was forced to apply for personal data by post on a case-by-case basis.
Yet the ban was lifted only three months later. A DVLA spokesman said inspectors visited the firm and decided it was using the data "appropriately".
MP Mr Meale said he would demand an explanation of the decision from Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly.
Martin Bingley, a spokesman for the Mansfield action group, said: "Excel has an appalling reputation for failing to respond to appeals and for insisting they are right and the customer wrong."
Excel, which has now lost its contract to run the Portland car park, said it was "disappointed" by the court ruling in Ms Hetherington-Jakeman's favour and was considering an appeal.


Judge quashes £300 parking fine...because it set out to ‘frighten and intimidate’ driver| News | This is London

 

[Lady Whistledown]

My worry is if I ignore it they will then increase the fine and then increase it again and then perhaps go for a CCJ without my knowledge.

Therein lies the dilemma! I'm not sure how these things work, to be honest, obviously if you got a speeding ticket or one for parking on zig-zags, say, from the police, you'd have no choice, but I honestly don't know what the score is with private companies.

 

[little al]

My worry is if I ignore it they will then increase the fine and then increase it again and then perhaps go for a CCJ without my knowledge.

Seriously mate, DO NOT PAY.

Honestly don't let it bother you, read through some of my links.

 

[clippedgull]

My worry is if I ignore it they will then increase the fine and then increase it again and then perhaps go for a CCJ without my knowledge.

A cautionary note:

A pal of mine parked in the new Morrisons in St James Street, Brighton.

Met a friend and went for coffee, which turned into a four hour lunch.

Anyway, he got one of these letters. Ignored it, then last week bailiffs turned up. £275 later he was free from his 'fine' Town and City were the car park enforcers.

Now that might not happen for everyone, but just thought I would give you the other side of the 'bin it, forget it' brigade.

 

[sam86]

Send them an invoice for unwanted photography.

 

[Giraffe]

Seriously mate, DO NOT PAY.

Honestly don't let it bother you, read through some of my links.

Even on these links though there are some people saying you should pay. I understand what you are saying but really don't want to suddenly be left with a £300 bill and a potential credit problem.

 

[little al]

I am quoting one of the posts on moneysavingexpert.com, as I feel its relevent


"It is all about balance of probablilities.There is a huge amount of information on the internet from those that have similar tickets.

Having a quick look through these posts shows that if you totally ignore the ticket, depending on the company that issue it, you will receive 5 to 8 increasingly scary letters trying to make you pay.Those that ignore these eventually see the PPC give up.

Be on your guard, some of these letters claim to come from solicitors, or even a court. The only letter to take notice of is a genuine court summons. Since it is not cost effective for most PPC's to go down this route, they will eventually give up and concentrate on those that indicate thay might eventually cave in.

As an added bonus, CEL, who issued your ticket don't 'do' court"

 

[little al]

A cautionary note:

A pal of mine parked in the new Morrisons in St James Street, Brighton.

Met a friend and went for coffee, which turned into a four hour lunch.

Anyway, he got one of these letters. Ignored it, then last week bailiffs turned up. £275 later he was free from his 'fine' Town and City were the car park enforcers.

Now that might not happen for everyone, but just thought I would give you the other side of the 'bin it, forget it' brigade.

Bailiffs can only enforce a court order, they were probably just debt collecters who should be told to do one. Your pal was mugged.

 

[sten_super]

I'm sorry, I'm probably not going to be very popular here, but surely those that don't pay these fines are just complete chancers?

Giraffe, I accept that you may have a genuine greivance, however the vast vast majority of supermarket car parks have signs up stating that there is a maximum amount of time you can park there, and that you must be a customer to use the car park. It's pretty standard. If you genuinely did not see the sign, and were not aware of the restriction, then you've been unlucky.

I can see that these may not (according to moneysavingexpert) be legally enforcable, but I don't really have a problem with abiding by a set of rules if I choose to park on someone else's private land. If the maximum parking time is 2 hours, and I'm aware that it's 2 hours, and I get done for staying longer than that, then as far as I'm concerned I'm fair game to get a penalty charge. I don't really understand the mentality of those that think otherwise. Why should a company operate a (free) car park for you to use and not impose its own regulations?