Forbidding Signage -no contract

[R0b]

Whilst I commend you for exploring the possibility of protecting these people, I think you are going to struggle. Each case is fact specific and not all parking allegations are exactly the same circumstances. Whether people cave in or cough up at the threat of being taken to court, that really comes down to that individual's choice. Each individual can choose defend the claim and consider a counterclaim but if they would rather pay up then that is perfectly fine also.

Realistically, the only way I can see parking companies change their mindset is to challenge them by making applications for strike out, summary judgment and counterclaims. If successful, the parking companies will stand to lose money and will have to consider a more compliant way of doing things or run the risk of loss vs reward.

Robust responses can and sometimes will put parking companies off if they are dealing with someone who knows their stuff, rather than slinging out generic template responses or ignoring the letters.

Applications to strike out or seek summary judgment on the basis of the particulars of claim is likely to result in the court ordering the parking companies to re-file their particulars so that it makes clear the basis of their claim. If the application is successful, the cost of doing that is usually a costs order of £275 against the parking company plus any other costs the court may award for the defendant's attendance or preparation of the application. They then have to decide whether to continue the claim in light of those costs especially if there is a threat of a counterclaim for harassment or some other claim. Again, the more people that take the chance and opt down this route, the more likely it will shift the parking companies into becoming more compliant.

Going down the fraud route will almost always fail at the first hurdle unless you have solid evidence to prove fraud/deceit and I'm not talking hearsay, rather to the standard a qualified lawyer would expect to take to court. At the end of the day, parking companies usually have a legitimate right to manage and pursue parking charges based on a landowner agreement and that will be your downfall in relation to allegations of fraud.

It really comes down to individual choice.

[falconio]

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

For an individual case, I would agree. But when considered in the whole, it's a massive nut. Many thousands of people are paying charges for breaching contracts that never existed - that the alleged debtors know never existed. The sums of money are astronomical - many £millions a year.

Cracking that nut will require a lot more than the proverbial sledgehammer. I'm merely curious to know whether or not a crowdfunded class action by people who have fallen victim to this scam might be possible.

[falconio]

Whilst I commend you for exploring the possibility of protecting these people, I think you are going to struggle. Each case is fact specific and not all parking allegations are exactly the same circumstances. Whether people cave in or cough up at the threat of being taken to court, that really comes down to that individual's choice. Each individual can choose defend the claim and consider a counterclaim but if they would rather pay up then that is perfectly fine also.

Realistically, the only way I can see parking companies change their mindset is to challenge them by making applications for strike out, summary judgment and counterclaims. If successful, the parking companies will stand to lose money and will have to consider a more compliant way of doing things or run the risk of loss vs reward.

Robust responses can and sometimes will put parking companies off if they are dealing with someone who knows their stuff, rather than slinging out generic template responses or ignoring the letters.

Applications to strike out or seek summary judgment on the basis of the particulars of claim is likely to result in the court ordering the parking companies to re-file their particulars so that it makes clear the basis of their claim. If the application is successful, the cost of doing that is usually a costs order of £275 against the parking company plus any other costs the court may award for the defendant's attendance or preparation of the application. They then have to decide whether to continue the claim in light of those costs especially if there is a threat of a counterclaim for harassment or some other claim. Again, the more people that take the chance and opt down this route, the more likely it will shift the parking companies into becoming more compliant.

Going down the fraud route will almost always fail at the first hurdle unless you have solid evidence to prove fraud/deceit and I'm not talking hearsay, rather to the standard a qualified lawyer would expect to take to court. At the end of the day, parking companies usually have a legitimate right to manage and pursue parking charges based on a landowner agreement and that will be your downfall in relation to allegations of fraud.

It really comes down to individual choice.

I understand that each case is fact-specific.

And I believe other issues are equally worthy of similar scrutiny - such as when a private parking company fails to comply with PoFA (ie sends out the Notice to Keeper too late) and still pursues the keeper to the bitter end in the hope of finding a County Court Judge who agrees with them that it is reasonable to assume that the keeper was the driver.. This, when they know they can only pursue the driver (whom they cannot identify).

But I'm not addressing such issues here. I'm addressing the very specific practice of intimidating and harassing people into paying an extortionate charge for a breach of a contract that the alleged creditor knows doesn't, and never did, exist.

I'm talking, specifically, about cases where parking on a piece of private land where no parking is offered, and is, in fact, forbidden by the signage (trespass), results in a charge, pursued with menaces, for breach of contract.

I do appreciate your insight and advice though. I just don't think things will change through the actions of individuals. I think it will take collective action - either by a class action and/or crowdfunding.

[R0b]

I don't really have anything more to add and I think you will be hard pushed to find a law firm/barrister to take this kind of claim on let alone convince them that the kind of allegations have any legs. I still believe that the best way to change the way these parking companies act is for the individuals to strike back where it hurts.

[falconio]

I don't really have anything more to add and I think you will be hard pushed to find a law firm/barrister to take this kind of claim on let alone convince them that the kind of allegations have any legs. I still believe that the best way to change the way these parking companies act is for the individuals to strike back where it hurts.

Thanks for your time and advice. I asked a question and I've received comprehensive answers. I'm helping somebody with a case now and I will be doing my best to to help them "strike back where it hurts". Thanks again.