Browsing through my latest copy of the Caravan Club magazine - (yes I know its sad!) read a letter from a gentleman who parked his outfit at Cherwell Services on the M40 in order to use the facilities.
He states that as he drove in he followed the signs to the caravan/coach park, Some of the further signs were obscured and he found the caravan park entrance obstructed by coaches. He parked in the coach car park for about 10 mins whilst he availed himself of the facilities..
He further states that a delivery driver pointed out to him that he was parked in the wrong area however no one else approached him and after the break he continued his journey.
6 weeks later he received a letter from a firm of solicitors who stated that a charge notice had been issued and demanded £60. They threatend court action for non payment if he refused. He contacted the solicitors stating that the fine had been issued retrospectively and that he had not been given the opportunity to move. An agreement was reached to pay £30 only.
I make the following observations:-
1. Service areas are privately owned but are public places. They are not roads under the Road Traffic Act. Motorists are invited into the areas FOC to make use of the facilities, infact there are signs at the side of the Motorways actively encouraging there use.
2. Therefore the motorist is not a trespasser and at that stage could not be treated as one, i.e. clamped.
3. The Services are set out to accomodate certain catagories of vehicles in certain areas to facilitate ease of use. The use of those areas cannot be made compulsory under statute as they are as stated private property.
My feeling is that this gentleman has been well and truly had but am aware that areas within airports are strictly Policed and fines levied so they must be covered under a particular statute/bye law.
Anyone any ideas they would like to put in the pot.
Andrew.
|
I presume, as it is not stated, that the letter and subsequent discussion failed to mention any statute or regulation infringed. This looks like a civil matter - a private concern exercising their rights over private parking and County Court action if necessary to recover fine?
DVD.
|
|
|
Under item 1, motorists are NOT invited FOC onto motorway service areas. They are not free public access places.
They are able to use them in accordance with the conditions the service area has ie stay for over 2 hours in exchange for a fee, have a meal using the facilities provided and pay.
Under item 2, if you do not adhere to the conditions ie stay over 2 hours, you must pay. Failure to pay will enable them to take appropriate action until the fee is paid.
Under item 3, you now claim they ARE private places! Like I said, fail to comply with the conditions and they can take appropriate action against you. If there was an accident because an inconsiderate driver parked in an incorrect area, who would you think is responsible? The service provider or the driver?
No, sorry, too many people don't check, they just assume they can do as they like.
|
Can anyone give a definitive answer on the history of ownership and operation. My recollection, in relation to the early motorways eg on the M1 Watford Gap/LFE/Toddington etc is that they were provided by the state and let as concessions with strict conditions about 24/7 service etc and took a share of the revenue. Thatcher de regulated them in some way, and probably more so since.
Later builds such as Donnington may be under differernt regimes.
The parking charges arise in part from folks using them as car parks and getting a taxi into town or car sharing the last bit.
My view on demands for cash for infringements would be to fight unless i was banged to rights as an overstayer.
|
As far as Im aware, the motorway service areas are put out to tender. While it is true to say the services operator has to comply with DoT regulations and requirements they are NOT public places.
The operator effectively 'invites' motorists to the service area to make use of the facilities and hand over their cash in the process.
The operator can also charge for entry or parking on the provided parking area but they don't because they know many people would not stop to use them in such circumstances. So, they levy a charge after so long because they expect a quick 'churn' rate of customers and, if you stay too long new customers either cannot park or decide to drive through because they cannot find anywhere to park.
As any other car park facility, they can charge you if you do not keep to their conditions or requirements.
|
|
As for the operator gracefully "inviting" me to visit his charming service area, from the condition of most I've had the misfortune to visit, and the extortionate cost of the shoddy wares he purveys and the hostile attendants he employs, I decline said invite wherever possoble.
|
As a qualified lawyer, my advice to the unfortunate recipient of the charge notice would be to tell the solicitors to take a running jump. If they are determined to take the matter further they would have to issue proceedings in the small claims court. It is unlikely they would go to the trouble of doing so for £60. If they did, the proceedings would automatically be transferred to the defendant's own local court as soon as a defence was filed, making it even more inconvenient for the solicitors. As costs are not generally recoverable in the small claism court, the odds a strongly that the lawyers will give up.
i suspect that if they do have a right to recover the money, then that right will be a contractual one. In order to establish that their parking terms apply, they need to show that they are brought to their customers' attention. It seems that in this case, they were not. That is why clampers have to clearly display a notice etc.
|
I am very pleased to see that someone legally qualified has contributed to this question. I have to differ from his opinion that nobody would bother to chase £60. I have just done this with a Small Claim and with great success. Somebody owed me money and refused to pay; I paid to have various court orders, warrants and execution orders issued, the baillifs called twice, and I have got my money and all my costs back less about £2 worth of phone calls and postage stamps. It cost the person £112 to repay me the £60 he owed me. I wouldn't hesitate to do it again; the courts were very helpful all through, there are websites telling you how to proceed and all it takes is a very little time and effort. This may be where motorway services give up on the process - time and effort.
A subsidary question. If motorway service are areas which are not public but are places onto which the public are 'invited' is it necessary to have valid tax and insurance to be there?
|
A.S.: << I wouldn't hesitate to do it again; the courts were very helpful all through, there are websites telling you how to proceed and all it takes is a very little time and effort. This may be where motorway services give up on the process - time and effort.
A subsidary question. If motorway service are areas which are not public but are places onto which the public are 'invited' is it necessary to have valid tax and insurance to be there? >>
1. Of course, Joe Solicitor was referring to it not being worth the cost of employng solicitors to recover a disputed £60. Although solicitors and plumbers (presumably judging by your name "A.S.", you in the plumbing trade) may charge the same hourly rates, and despite your belief that it was worth your time to go to Court, for most people it does not make sense to pay a solicitor £500 to recover £60.
2. wrt to your sub question - no insurance or tax is needed on private property, if you can get your car without using public roads (say on a transporter or such like). Of course if your car causes "damage", you may have to pay from your own pocket (and for any damage to your car that you are unable to blame on a third party.)
|
2. wrt to your sub question - no insurance or tax is needed on private property, if you can get your car without using public roads (say on a transporter or such like). Of course if your car causes "damage", you may have to pay from your own pocket (and for any damage to your car that you are unable to blame on a third party.)
Surely insurance is required on private property to which the public has access e.g. a car park or camping site. In addition, you imply that insurance would not pay out for incidents on private property. I've never seen a policy which says this. If I hit a car in a car park or even on land to which the public do not have access and I'm at fault, then my insurance would pay for damage to both cars i.e. the insurance position is the same as if the accident happened on a public road.
|
IMHO both answers are correct.....It may be worth the gamble that the Service Area's solicitors might give up as the cost escalates, on the other hand they might not dependant on the owners of the site and their will to proceed.
Insurance and VED are vexed questions in this issue. I would tend to suggest that certain bits of the area are sufficient compliant with the relev. Act and a good dozen stated cases of what are and are not public roads. VED is another issue, my submission would be if its not maintained at public expense no need for a tax disc - however if you were displaying a fraudulant tax disc that's possibly and probably enforcable...
As regards plumber's hourley rate being anywhere near what a poor solicitor could ever hope to earn - I won't even comment.
|
...thank you PU! You are the latest contributor to the Official Growler Oxymoron Compendium with your entry "Poor Solicitor".
This joins an eclectic collection of others, through "Airline Food" to "Political Ethics" and "Rap Music". :+)
|
More for the Compendium Bogush:
Sunderland University, Microsoft Works, Holy War, Business Ethics, Military Intelligence, American Culture, quantum leap
|
|
I meant Growler. A zillion apologies.
|
|
I'm sure he was flattered!;-)
|
growler, pleased to meet another collector!!
Personal favourites; Socialist Worker and Ministry of Justice
|
|
|
O20ne. I do agree it is not worth using a £100/hour solicitor to chase £60. My point was that I did it for nothing more than 4 stamps and 10 minutes on the phone plus my time and it was highly cost effective, to me. The Small Claims Court seems to be user friendly, efficient and virtually free. I can hardly wait for someone to owe me money again!
|
I can hardly wait for someone to owe me money again!
Really?
I'd be only too happy to oblige - seeing as how much you enjoy debt collecting!
Lend us 50 quid 'til payday, mate ...
:)
[BTW, our local debt collectors happen to be nice, friendly congolese types. A mate 'used' them when he was having problems recovering the cost of a new headlamp cluster for his Golf, after some careless git had reversed into him. Despite promises of "I'll sort you out next week", nothing happened until the git received a friendly visit from the dark duo ... Money coughed up post-haste.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
KeithB: I was not very clear - I meant to say that there is no legal requirement to have insurance for a car kept on private property. Then, if damage is caused to or by your uninsured car, you would have to pay out of your own pocket.
Of course, for a fuller answer, I should also have added that an untaxed car kept off the public road should still have a SORN.
And as far as it being uneconomical to pay £500 to a Solicitor to recover £60: there are many instances in the state ("public") sector where this happens, although in the private sector these tend be rare. Exceptions in the private sector are when someone decides to take a case to the bitter end in the pursuit of some high principle.
Growler: Is there any link where your oxymoron collection can be accessed? IMO they deserve be published!
|
<0.One%
Growlette is assembling a collection of motoring-vaguely-related
Filipinia and personal stuff of absolutely no interest to anyone except for posting on Yahoo for all her friends at the cybercaff and I know this has been mentioned (threatened) many times before. Right now it's not much, but yes I shall ensure the Oxy's find their way thereon, along with my prized collection of bumper sticker quotes.
Change is inevitable -- progress is optional.
|
|
Whoops ! Posted at the end of a long day. Poor has so many meanings !
|
|
|
Growler, I was told of this one a few weeks ago:
"If you can read this, I've lost my caravan."
|
|
|
|
|
