Mother facing legals bills of £30,000 after court battle over £40 parking ticket
 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...cid=spartanntp

I personally think that this is the most ridiculous stories that l have actually read.

And l think that the Council and parking enforcement company and debt company should be totally ashamed of themselves.

What we have here is over zealous traffic wardens - NINE TICKETS on the car.

What is wrong with checking if the car is niocked or not. Councils can actually check the vehicle.

I know of an incident where l work that the vehicle was full of leaves, and dust. Yet over zealous enforcement officers place more and more tickets per day. And it was found out that the man had died. Yet, the council kept on chasing the widow for money.

I just wished that Council used there brains and not a money making machine - US.

And signs should be more clearer

Re: Doesn't make sense
 

Arthur you’re being told many times about these nondescript titles...

Re: Doesn't make sense
 

The picture is a stock picture as an example. Only one ticket was involved.

She decided to take it further. Nobody forced her.

Re: Mother facing legals bills of £30,000 after court battle over £40 parking ticket
 

Re: Mother facing legals bills of £30,000 after court battle over £40 parking ticket
 

Can you get Arthur to make sense????

Re: Mother facing legals bills of £30,000 after court battle over £40 parking ticket
 

I spoke to my son about this and he said any good lawyer would have advised her husband to 1st write to the council clearly explaining why he objected especially if he had mitigating circumstances that he wanted to be taken into consideration in his appeal, then should the appeal be unsuccessful he said that any good lawyer would advice paying any council issued ticket as the cost of losing is not worth the original cost of the parking ticket.

She is in her final year for a law degree and one would assume that she would have known the above and if not she should have did her homework before she decided to take on the bailiffs responsible for clamping her car who were more than likely working on behalf of the council in the first place.

Whereas parking on private on land is a total different ball game and totally different ruling applies in Scotland (well it did at the time when my son wrote to a parking company acting on behalf of B&M) I know this simply because a few years ago someone my son knows very well ;) received a parking fine when parking in the local B&M car park and our son wrote to them saying something along the lines of

To whom it may concern,

I am writing on behalf of Mr xxxxx about your recent correspondence dated xx/xx/xxxx. In Scotland I'm of the understanding that the onus is on the car park or parking company to prove that the contract was entered into and by whom entered into that contract (example who was driving the vehicle in question) until you can prove who was actually driving the car on said day and time, I have advised Mr xxxxx to await your reply regarding this.

I would be grateful if you could advice if this is not the case under Scottish Law and confirm what is the Law in Scotland in regards to this fine.

I would be obliged if you could supply further advice on this matter as requested and within a reasonable time-frame giving the demands and oppressive wording used in your letter, having said this please note that Scotland does not have Bailiffs it is of my opinion using the wording of Bailiffs can only be described as oppressive wording and misleading giving the fact that Scotland does not have Bailiffs.

It is also worth noting that Scotland opted out of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which introduced keeper liability in England and Wales.

Therefore since the 2012 Act does not apply in Scotland, the registered keeper of a vehicle cannot be held liable for unpaid parking charges.

If Mr xxxxx is liable for these charges again please advise but it is worth noting that Mr xxxx was at his place of work with the radius being 15.7 miles away when this event took place if needed Mr xxxx can supply this evidence.

The letter was then signed without prejudice :D

I don't know if it was luck but shortly after this letter was sent the person in question received a letter from them stating that as a goodwill gesture they will not be proceeding matters any further and should now ignore the original letter reference xxxxxxx

Now should the company have insisted payment I can assure you it would have been paid in full no more questions asked, just not worth the risk adding legal costs to the fine imo.

Re: Mother facing legals bills of £30,000 after court battle over £40 parking ticket
 

Good letter however I would not bothered replying (btw I also live in Scotland).

Re: Mother facing legals bills of £30,000 after court battle over £40 parking ticket
 

Not relevant as this was a council fine.

The costs were from challenging the bailiffs, not the original fine.

Puzzled as to why she brought the action and not him. Was it to get around paying the costs? IE He can pay, but she can't.

Re: Mother facing legals bills of £30,000 after court battle over £40 parking ticket
 

I'm fully aware it was a council fine and that is why I said at the start of my post I just happened to add to my post that parking on private land is a totally different ball game and spoke of a experience that I knew off, that's all.

Plus I think I made it quite clear should appealing on both types of fines fail then it would be advised to pay the fine as the cost of losing is not worth the original cost of the parking ticket.

Yes this kinda greed happens ALOT in the USA!!

Yes ridiculous and she should attain a laywer!!