private parking firms ParkingEye V Beavis

[chimneys]

Get the CLAMPS out

Nipple?

 

[beorhthelm]

But the implication in your post is that there is wide spread abuse. There isn't.

are you suggesting there is no abuse of parking, parking on private land or people overstaying etc?

 

[Notters]

are you suggesting there is no abuse of parking, parking on private land or people overstaying etc?

Quite clearly he isn't.

 

[Official Old Man]

Question, and I'll use Lewes Tesco & Aldi as an example.
On street or off street parking is chargable in Lewes but you can park in the massive Tesco car park for free for ?? hours (maybe 2).
What right do you have to park and go to work for the day? None.
If they (whoever manages the car park) give you a 'fine' then it's your fault. Don't go whimpering off to Westdene to argue your case.
On the other hand, you park in a car park belonging to your Mums flat whilst visiting her and get a 'fine', then fight it.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

are you suggesting there is no abuse of parking, parking on private land or people overstaying etc?

Of course not. What I am saying is that what abuse does happen rarely costs the landowner any money and extremely rarely the parking company any money. When was the last time you were unable to park in one of these 'managed' car parks ? In the last five or so years I'd probably list Tescos at Holmbush during the week leading up to Christmas and Aldi in Portslade a couple fo times. At none of those times can I confirm the problem was abuse of the car parking - more likely too many customers.

So given the landowner rarely racks up any costs how do PPCs calculate GPEOL at £100 ? And let's remember in contract law it would only be the landowner / leasee that is entitled to claim GPEOL not the parking company.

 

[beorhthelm]

Of course not. What I am saying is that what abuse does happen rarely costs the landowner any money and extremely rarely the parking company any money.

right. and accepting there isn't much tangible impact, i understand your point on the abuse on behalf of the parking companies. however we should accept that there is abuse of parking (otherwise the industry wouldn't have begun), and the point being made was that needs to be addressed. the suggested smaller/enforceable fine seems a decent way forward. if done right it should make third party enforcement redundant, so win all round.

 

[Creaky]

So given the landowner rarely racks up any costs how do PPCs calculate GPEOL at £100 ? And let's remember in contract law it would only be the landowner / leasee that is entitled to claim GPEOL not the parking company.

That was covered in the judgement

The present case throws up considerations of an entirely different character from those which arise in the ordinary commercial context. Viewed in purely financial terms, ParkingEye suffers no direct financial loss if an individual motorist overstays the period of free parking, because it has no interest in the land over which the licence is granted and suffers no immediate loss in terms of income that might otherwise have been derived from another motorist using the car park, as it would if customers were charged a flat rate for using it. However, it may suffer a loss indirectly, because its contract with the Pension Fund requires it to manage the car park in a way that enables it to provide the service which the Pension Fund contracts for, namely, making free parking available for a limited period for the benefit of its tenants and their customers. That involves allowing motorists free parking for up to two hours only. An inability to deliver the service required by the Pension Fund would be likely to result in the loss of its contract, with consequential financial loss and damage to its commercial reputation. To that extent ParkingEye has a commercial interest in the due observance of the terms of the licence which is similar to the interest of the manufacturer in the Dunlop case. Moreover, although it would in theory be possible to charge motorists a much more modest amount for overstaying the free period, it would be wholly uneconomic to enforce such charges by taking legal proceedings against them. [\QUOTE]

 

[Garage_Doors]

Question, and I'll use Lewes Tesco & Aldi as an example.
On street or off street parking is chargable in Lewes but you can park in the massive Tesco car park for free for ?? hours (maybe 2).
What right do you have to park and go to work for the day? None.
If they (whoever manages the car park) give you a 'fine' then it's your fault. Don't go whimpering off to Westdene to argue your case.
On the other hand, you park in a car park belonging to your Mums flat whilst visiting her and get a 'fine', then fight it.

To be fair i think it was Lady Seagull who was promoting that fact you could park in a retail car park all day and the fact she did so many times knowing you could fight the "fine".