PARKING COWBOYS v. BIGOT-JOHNSON  ( 2016 ) CASE No.2 

For a second time this infamous money grabbing company issued a £70 PCN against Bigot-Johnson who for a second time refused to pay. Determined to crush and punish those who defy their threatening demands for money,  the company hired yet another crack lawyer to take on a doggedly determined Bigot . The following extract from the trial's transcript appears below.

Counsel for the plaintiff :  You cannot deny Bigot that your car was parked at a time when you had no valid ticket 
B-J : What.....I recall the 2 hour ticket purchased allowed me to park up to 4.30 pm.....and I left the car park at exactly 4.13pm
CP : Correct....... but the ticket was purchased at 2.30......and our cameras registered your entry into the car park at 2.05 pm. So by the terms of the contract you entered into you were required to exit the car park by 4.05 pm
B-J : What.......it took me 5 minutes to find a vacant bay......then another 20 minutes to read your umpteenth version of revised terms and conditions in order to fully understand the basis of what contract I was entering into
CP: The rules are strict......your ticket only covered you for 2 hours ....but your car was on our premises for 2 hours 8 minutes ......a clear and blatant overstay which warrants a punitive PCN  
B-J : Hold on......but every motorist has to park up first before making his/her way to the ticket machine, which automatically means there will be a few minutes of parking before the contract is made at the ticket machine
CP : Correct .....but the starting time is always calculated back to the time of entry as recorded by the camera........it's the way the cookie crumbles
B-J : So that means hundreds of motorists could easily be caught out this way
CP :  Without a doubt.....in fact Parking Cowboys have used this ingenious  trap to stitch up motorists good and proper , such is the extent of their unending greed and hell bent desire to maximise profits 
B-J : You mean profiting by means of deception and extortion
CP : That's one way of putting it......but the company regards these practices as being commercially justified in a corporate world where consumer exploitation is legitimate and rife