Link Parking v H C5GF86CX. Bristol 20/3/2017
Mr H parked at his own residence and displayed a permit. He appeal, but the appeal was ignored. He also responded to the letter before claim, but was ignored.
Link Parking decided to take him to court anyway.
The Hearing
The judge ruled that they had broken their own procedures in not engaging with Mr H.
The case rested on whether or not placing the permit in the rear windscreen was a violation of the parking terms. The judge ruled it wasn't.
Prankster Note
There are a large number of Lakeshore residents who have been the victim of Martin Gardener's unscrupulous and underhand tactics.
Although Link Parking were not specifically mention in yesterday's debate in parliament, it is clear that MPs are worried about the practices of companies such as Link Parking and their owner Martin Gardener.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
Putting the fun back into parking
Click for guide to fighting ParkingEye court claims
Click for help with low-cost appeals and court defences
I do hope that photocopies of this judgement, with advice on how to make a claim, somehow find their way through the letterbox of the residents.
ReplyDeleteIt’s a pity Indigo Parking Services wasn’t debated in parliament.
ReplyDeleteThey are claiming what could turn out to be in excess of £120,000.00 (A hundred and twenty thousand pounds) for so called permit breaches against 200 nurses and staff at the University of Wales Hospital at the Heath Cardiff.
But our turn will come when a “District Judge” hears three test cases of 200 claims in October/November.