Forbidding Signage -no contract

[falconio]

Many parking charges are dismissed at court due to there being no contract (no offer of parking). Would it be possible to take legal action for fraud against companies that continue to harass and intimidate people into paying money for breach of a contract they know doesn't exist?

[atticus]

Do you understand that parking your vehicle in a place with notices displaying terms can amount to acceptance of a contract?

The following is from the Supreme Court press summary of its decion in Parking Eye v Beavis.

"Mr Beavis had a contractual licence to park in the car park on the terms of the notice posted at the entrance, including the two hour limit. The £85 was a charge for contravening the terms of the contractual licence. This is a common scheme, subject to indirect regulation by statute and the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice. The charge had two main objects: (i) the management of the efficient use of parking space in the interests of the retail outlets and their users by deterring long-stay or commuter traffic, and (ii) the generation of income in order to run the scheme. "

[des8]

It is not unknown for the signage which the companies claim offers the terms of a contract for parking, actually forbids parking.
Result : claim dismissed if challenged.

In answer to OP's question: more pragmatically, would it be worth the candle?

[atticus]

des8 I agree - but these are defences to claims that a contract exists. My point is that claims can be made, and those claims can be contested - and the judge decides. That is the way the system provided by the state for resolving disputes between citizens works.

[falconio]

Do you understand that parking your vehicle in a place with notices displaying terms can amount to acceptance of a contract?

The following is from the Supreme Court press summary of its decion in Parking Eye v Beavis.

"Mr Beavis had a contractual licence to park in the car park on the terms of the notice posted at the entrance, including the two hour limit. The £85 was a charge for contravening the terms of the contractual licence. This is a common scheme, subject to indirect regulation by statute and the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice. The charge had two main objects: (i) the management of the efficient use of parking space in the interests of the retail outlets and their users by deterring long-stay or commuter traffic, and (ii) the generation of income in order to run the scheme. "

Surely Parking Eye v Beavis doesn.t apply where there is no offer. No offer of parking = no contract. Am I wrong?

[atticus]

As I said, there can be defences to a claim for damages for breach of contract.

[R0b]

Many parking charges are dismissed at court due to there being no contract (no offer of parking). Would it be possible to take legal action for fraud against companies that continue to harass and intimidate people into paying money for breach of a contract they know doesn't exist?

A contractual right to park and a forbidden/prohibited parking sign are in my view mutually exclusive and cannot co-exist together. Either you have the right to park or you don't, in which case you become a trespasser.

As to your original question, you may be able to argue deceit but you would have to prove some form of loss such as paying the parking co. the sums of money they are demanding. That kind of action is like taking a sledgehammer to a nut and would advise against it because allegations of fraud/deceit are not something which usually gets allocated to the small claims track, and so you run the risk of costs.

There are much simpler ways of handling these kinds of claims by making an application for summary judgment at an early stage before filing a defence or a counterclaim for harassment as you say which then puts the parking company on the backfoot and forcing them to file a defence to argue why it's not a forbidden sign and instead a contractual arrangement.

[atticus]

I agree that if signs forbid parking on a particular bit of land, then surely someone who parks there without permission is trespassing

[falconio]

Many parking charges are dismissed at court due to there being no contract (no offer of parking). Would it be possible to take legal action for fraud against companies that continue to harass and intimidate people into paying money for breach of a contract they know doesn't exist?

As I understand it, the Beavis case doesn't apply here. That case involved paid parking where an offer to park was made and where a consideration was posted. His act of parking was deemed an acceptance that completed the contract. I believe that case was about the justification for the level of the charge and the right of the private parking company to levy the charge.

My question addresses cases where companies claim a contractual obligation where no contract could exist because no offer of parking was made. Private parking companies harass and intimidate many thousands of people a year into paying charges for breach of contract where no contract ever existed.

Given that the private parking companies are doing this, in the full knowledge that there is no contract, how does it not amount to: "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."?

[atticus]

The OP quotes a definition of fraud. Is he considering that there may be an offence under the Fraud Act 2006, or something else?

[falconio]

It is not unknown for the signage which the companies claim offers the terms of a contract for parking, actually forbids parking.
Result : claim dismissed if challenged.

In answer to OP's question: more pragmatically, would it be worth the candle?

Is it worth the candle? Private parking companies harass and intimidate many thousands of people a year into paying charges for breach of contract in full knowledge that no contract was ever made,

Given that the private parking companies are doing this, how does it not amount to: "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain."?

Given the obscene amounts they are extorting, why would it not be worth the candle? Maybe a class action (crowdfunded) to stop them doing this once and for all and to afford victims definitive grounds for claiming their money back?

My original question was about establishing the objective legality of the private parking companies' actions rather than the subjective issue of whether it's worth doing. My hunch is that no court would re-write fraud laws to allow private parking companies to unilaterally turn trespass into breach of contract.........but I'm not a lawyer.

[falconio]

The OP quotes a definition of fraud. Is he considering that there may be an offence under the Fraud Act 2006, or something else?

Of course. I believe my quote was from the Oxford Dictionary. As I've said elsewhere, I am not a lawyer, merely a layman seeking advice. I'm trying to understand why these companies are allowed, with impunity, to intimidate and threaten people into paying a charge for breach of a contract they know doesn't exist.

I merely seek to explore the possibility of stopping them from doing this.

[falconio]

There are much simpler ways of handling these kinds of claims by making an application for summary judgment at an early stage before filing a defence or a counterclaim for harassment as you say which then puts the parking company on the backfoot and forcing them to file a defence to argue why it's not a forbidden sign and instead a contractual arrangement.

I don't disagree in theory. I have dealt with many of these cases on behalf of victims and have found that to the average layman, the County Court route is not a 'simple' option.

I can't count the number of times I've written appeals to private parking companies (denied), PoPLA and the IAS (denied), watched as the victims reluctantly ignore (on my advice) ever more threatening letters from debt collection agencies (claiming that bailiffs and/or CC judgements and massive extra charges are inevitable if you don't pay now) only to cave in and pay on receipt of a Letter Before Action.

It's people's fear of the consequences of not paying that allows these companies to continue to make £millions every year. Not being a lawyer, I don't know if a case could be made that it amounts to fraud. That was really what I was asking. As I said, I think there are enough victims to 'crowdfund' a case - if there is any prospect that a case for fraud could be made.

[falconio]

des8 That is the way the system provided by the state for resolving disputes between citizens works.

And for most citizens, given the threats and intimidation issued by the private parking companies, the 'system' is of little use.

For several years I assisted people in fighting private parking charges. After having appeals to the private companies and PoPLA or the IAS dismissed, many cave in and pay because of the empty threats in endless letters from debt collection agencies.

For most of those that survive that process, it's the receipt of a Letter Before Action and the fear of having to negotiate a County Court case that does it. An explanation of Pre-Action Protocols is often the final straw. That usually provokes a swift: "Pre-Action what? Look, I'll just pay and have done with it."

All I'm trying to do is explore possibilities for protecting people from this unseemly and distressful process in the first place - to stop companies from extorting money from people with (often empty) threats for breach of a contract they know full well was never made and doesn't exist.

[atticus]

Maybe what you need to do is pick a suitable case to run as a test case for your argument - perhaps seeking an order for costs on the Small Claims track due to what you would say is the unreasonable way the case has been pursued.