Mr H parked and purchased a valid ticket which he displayed on the dashboard. When he returned to his car he found a parking charge because at some time the ticket had turned upside down. This was the second hearing. The first was adjourned.
The judge dismissed the claim. He ruled that it was the responsibility of the parking company to provide sticky backed tickets and that he had already thrown out 6-10 of these type of cases which Link Parking had brought.
Prankster Note
With so many of these cases going to court it is obvious that Link Parking are not providing responsible parking management, but are out to rip off the consumer by trying to engineer as many charges as possible. This is a prime example of a predatory operation which is banned by the IPC Code of Practice.
There are many practical solutions to this problem, ranging from the simple - providing sticky tickets or printing information on both sides - to the complicated - pay on exit ANPR.
In this case Link Parking will have paid for their greediness by having to fork out twice for a solicitor to turn up and represent them, as well as Gladstone's other charges. The worry is how many innocent motorists will have been trapped into paying charges because of Link Parkings predatory practices.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
Hi just wondering is it enough to make reference to the court case or do i need to go into more detail about it?
ReplyDeleteThanks
As there is no transcript of this case the best you can do is refer to this article, include a copy in your evidence and then say that although there is no transcript Link are fully aware of this case as they were the claimant. Ask me more questions at prankster@parking-prankster.com
Delete