Thursday, 31 May 2018


Mrs Cammelleri's discovered to her horror that her car had been impounded for overtime parking. So would a tiny grammatical oversight be enough to save her from paying the fine ?
The offence she was alleged to have committed was a breach of a West Jefferson village parking ordinance , which stated it was illegal to park " any motor vehicle camper, trailer , farm implement and/or non-motorised vehicle " on a street for more than 24 hours. 
All bases covered ?. Well may be not.
Her defence was that her car wasn't a " motor vehicle camper ". Infact it appears that motor vehicles were not included in the list and therefore by deduction were exempt from the one day restriction.The municipal office were quick to point out that the grammatical error was inadvertant , and that it was obvious to everyone what the list set out to include. 
At the bench trial the case went against her.  The judge declared that " anyone reading the ordinance would recognise the fact that a comma was clearly missing , and that  motor vehicles were therefore included in the list......along with campers "   
But undeterred she appealed to the Twelfth Appellate District of Ohio.  Here, the three higher ranked judges held that there was ambiguity in the ordinance as it was written. Consequently , the claim for the $120 fine was dismissed. According to grammer rules , items in a series must be separated by commas. The judges concluded that reading "motor vehicle camper "  as one item did not produce an absurd result. If the village desired a different reading ( one to distiguish motor vehicles from campers ) then a comma should have been inserted.
Indeed in English law a car parking company can also be hoisted on the horns of its own petard through bad or inadequate wording on its signage. Ambiguity may well invoke the contra proferentem rule , which will often come to the aid of the weaker put-upon party.

Monday, 21 May 2018


Private parking companies could do no worse than change the existing albeit dreaded PCNs into something motorists would welcome and accept : new and exciting PCN scratchcards.
These would state what the parking violation was, along with the parking charge to be paid. However,  now there would be on offer three alternative options , one of which lies under the grey coated area to be scratched off...... should the motorists be prepared to gamble.  

Option 1.   Pay double   50 % chance

Option 2    Paying nothing   40 % chance

Option 3    We pay you the parking charge  10 % chance

The PCN scratchcard has to be returned to the company within 14 days or  face a much stiffer parking charge and court proceedings. If an unscratched PCN card is returned by letter ,  inside must be the payment for the original fine. If the scratched PCN card has revealed the pay double fine , a much more welcome cheque of course needs to accompany it.  Any motorist who sends in a winning PCN must remember to provide details of his/her bank account so that the payment can be made straightaway. Happy days indeed.

All this will bring fun and excitement to motorists who previously viewed PCNs with hatred, anger and contempt. The adrenalin will start flowing the moment the scratching takes place. The prospect of getting off scott free or perhaps even winning will be tantalisingly irresistible. The reality of having those expectations met will bring unbridled joy into a situation so often associated with doom and gloom .
This innovative concept could make the proposed new parking bill an irrelevancy with motorists for the first time ever more than happy to pick up PCNs.

Saturday, 19 May 2018


It beggars belief that some companies like Parking Eye and Excel go out of their way to treat their customers like shit. Their business model is based on obtaining money by fraud , seizing upon the slightest transgressions with pernicious bullying tactics , relying on victim's apathy or lack of funding to fight back. They never listen to reason or legitimate excuses . Their unforgiving and aggressive attitude towards motorists is breathtaking in its zealous and  ruthless pursuit of lucrative profits.
Whereas most businesses promote customer care as one of its core mission statement objectives, private parking companies choose to have a hidden agenda to " screw the bastards " anyway they can.  Whatever happened to showing customers a little bit of sympathy and respect ?
These modern day highway robbers go out of their way to make life  difficult , awkward and miserable for the motorists. Everything they do smacks of deliberate entrapment to lead their customers make mistakes .......and then hit them with the threats , intimidation and harassment to pay these deviously engineered albeit bogus fines. 
They are completely unhelpful in the extreme. Requests for information and/or explanations
are treated with contempt. Do they provide sticky-back tickets which adhere to the dashboard ? No. Do they choose to have a set up where payment for tickets is on exit ( not entry ) ? No. Do they allow overstayers to pay the extra on return to the car park ? Like hell they do. These are firms which have mind sets like a cruel sadistic tyrants.  
Name me one other company that " fines" its customers. Yes , customers may be asked to leave or be blacklisted. They will often be given warnings first about unacceptable behaviour. Many might well be chased for non-payment of goods and services , but in the main customers are valued because building up a strong customer base is essential if businesses are to survive in a world of highly competitive markets .
So why do private parking companies treat their customers with such contempt ? Well in many cases they have a captive market with parking spaces being at a premium. Demand will often outrun supply, and therefore if car parks are busy then it seems there is no need whatsoever to  envourage repeat custom. In other cases what does it matter if a car park is only half full. Clobbering just one unsuspecting motorist earns the same revenue as 50 paying ones. This racket has  almost become a licence to print money. Customers are like sitting in a barrel......there to be shot at time and time again.
The welcome sign ....such irony....always prominently displayed outside the car park modelled on the " welcome to my den said the spider to the fly " scenario , or on Hannibal Lector's invitation  " let me make you dinner tonight ". Motorists are never viewed as customers but victims on which to feast.. 



Another brazen attempt by a morally bankrupt private parking company to nail Bigot for ignoring his most recent PCN . This was issued on the basis that he failed to park within the designated lines of the bay. 

Image result for car parking lot images

Counsel for the plaintiff (CP) : As you can see your honour from this aerial photograph Bigot's car tyre was touching the white line .....contrary to the terms and conditions he agreed to abide by....... when he entered the contract of his own free choice
B-J : Which were ....?
CP : To park the car  "within " the the lines...........which in simple language means inside  
the lines 
B-J : And the purpose behind this term ?
CP : Well , this offence amounts to using up two bays......which in simple language means double parking.......a mischief which can cost the company a great deal of money in lost revenue
B-J : Yes......this could be the case if the car park is exceptionally busy with waiting motorists desperately looking out for available spaces.....but your photo clearly demonstrates that the parking lot was empty.......hence no mischief done
CP : But it is still a breach of Excel's conditions
B-J :  And the damage to revenue is what ?
CP : can't say exactly
Judge : Well seems to me that your relentless pursuit to shaft Bigot in court is nothing more than indulging in pernicious bullying tactics......and yes there has a breach but only on a petty technicality , which suggests nominal damages of £1.....with all costs of course to be met by the claimant. Case dismissed.
B-J : Don't you think £1 is a bit steep ?
Judge : Yes....on reflection I do.....change that to one penny
B-J : Your honour I am eternally grateful
Judge : And so you should cheeky little scallywag

Friday, 18 May 2018


- How are things ?
- Couldn't be's amazing how so many motorists pay up without a whimper
- I know....I know.......why the other day we nailed a confused old man who drove into our
  car  park by mistake .......fannied around looking for an exit ......before eventually finding 
  one and leaving. Needless to say we banged him a ticket and the silly old fool paid up
  having never actually parked his car
- Well......beat this .....we issued a PCN to a guy who bought a ticket and displayed it  
  on the dashboard as instructed.......trouble was the hot sun caused the ticket to curl up so
  much so..... our rottweiler attendant... with an IQ well below 60..... couldn't read it. The 
  awkward bugger put in an appeal but our inside man at POPLA told him the fine still had 
  to be paid.....and hey presto a cheque for £100 was duly paid 
- The sucker
- The sap
- Yes we could go on for ages with these wonderful stories of how motorists get taken  
   for a ride........but I am worried about this new Parking Bill that could become law within 
   the year
- Don't worry .....parliament will still give us enough leeway to carry on screwing motorists
   left, right and centre. With parking spaces at a premium we can always resort to doubling
   the hourly charges....and let's face it by making motorists pay on entry based on their  
  wildly optimistic predictions of what time they might need.....there will be vast numbers of 
  overstayers who we can legitimately clobber. Moreover if we increase the number of  
  reserved and disabled bays many wlll choose to chance it believing the car parks to be's like shhooting fish in a barrel
-  So good of you to reassure me
-  It's a pleasure
-  Going any way nice this year ?
-  Oh yes......just bought a million pound yacht to cruise around the mediterrean
-  Well .....have a good time....bye
-  Bye


Friday, 11 May 2018


Parking firms have continued to keep up the pretence that fines can be imposed upon motorists who fail to abide by their terms and conditions. " Fines " carry the connotation of criminal liability warranting compulsory payment. Such a devious and cunning ploy.
However all alleged contractual  breaches are simply and purely a civil matter , which mean that parking firms can only put in claims for liquidated damages . And as the law still stands today  these claims must be a genuine pre-estimate of the loss suffered as a direct result of the breach. The only exception being overstaying in a busy site where the only income for the operator comes from parking charges , which can in certain circumstances embody a deterrent component ( see Parking Eye v Beavis )
In pay-by-the-hour car parks which on most occasions are rarely full any liqidated damages claimed for breach of contract are still subject to existing Consumer Law regulations , along with many general principles established in Contract Law precedents.
One of these is that the injured party cannot make a profit from a alleged breach of contract, since the liqidated damages claimed must be based on a genuine pre-estimate of the loss. 
All this is perfectly fair and fine. Contract damages are meant to be compensatory. They cannot be wildl over-the-top estimates. Pre-determined damages cannot be set at an  amount that will put the injured party in a better position after the breach , than the party would be in if all the contractual terms had been performed.
So how in God's name can a fixed sum parking charge of £100 be a genuine pre-estimate of a loss , when a serious breach of a term carries the same punitive consequences as a minor and petty breach. How can a five minute overstay give rise to the same claim for damages as a 5 hour overstay. How can a £100 demand for compensation be genuine when the breach , such as failure to display correctly paid-for ticket, causes no loss of income to the parking firm whatsoever. 
But now let's look at the real lie and total lack of genuineness in their estimate of their losses. Usually they kick off with a standard £70 PCN. Is this genuine ? I think not. By offering a £30 discount for prompt payment suggests otherwise given that £40 is beginning to approach the correct estimate. Motorists who send in say a cheque for £15 to cover  alleged losses often don't get chased up for the rest. Why ? Well firstly , the company may still have made a profit out of the scam , and secondly the motorist could argue ( quite successfully in court ) the duty imposed upon firms to mitigate their losses has surely been achieved by this appropriate and fair payment..     
Private parking firms will no doubt continue to flout the law with utter contempt. Never ones to willingly mitigate their losses , they prefer to compound and esculate them with the help of dodgy debt collection agencies. They continue to find ways to deceive and entrap motorists into making mistakes. They resort to countless scams to boost their already obscene profits. They act without sympathy , compassion and forgiveness. They muscle in on supermarket sites on the pretext of resolving a traffic flow problem , which probably never existed in the first place. All part of a ruthless business model to exploit the thousand of motorists , who are prone to poor timekeeping and keying in incorrect car registration details. 
If these morally bankrupt operators were committed to basing parking charges on genuine pre-estimates of loss , then they were be forced to adopt a sliding scale of parking charges ranging from £2 to £20.......but no more. If there was ever an industry which seemingly has a licence to commit fraud ,  then the private parking industry stands head and shoulders above despised loan sharks and shameful big name banks.    

Thursday, 10 May 2018


When a motorist for whatever reason keys in the wrong car registration plate details but pays the correct money either a valid contract has been entered into or not.
Car parking firms can not say in one breath a contract has been entered into but the ticket is unfortunately invalid , because if a valid contract has been entered into then by definition the ticket has to be valid.
Moreover , if the ticket is deemed to be invalid by failure to carry out a precondition of the offer that correct CRP details are deemed to be an essential requirement to establish an unconditional acceptance of the offer, then by definition no contract has come into existence on which to allege any subsequent breach.

How private car parking firms have not been questioned in court over this curious point in law beggars belief. 


Tuesday, 8 May 2018


Bigot ,
Your blog with its outrageous articles in a disgrace. It's full of spurious allegations and wicked lies. How dare you !
Companies like mine run a legitimate busines where we look after the majority of honest, decent , rule-abiding motorists by hammering the selfish minority who refuse to carry out their  part of the contract.....which they freely entered into. If I had my way I would have all the rule breakers severely flogged as opposed to letting them off with payment of a modest and measly fine.
The undeniable fact is that these miscreant motorists seize the opportunity not to pay the fine , which causes companies like mine to spend a great deal of time and money.......making all manner of threats...... to keep the montrous bluff alive.
Why in God's name was clamping banned by parliament ? What is the world coming to when profiteering gravy trains are brought to a grinding halt ?  Clamping always got the buggers to pay up without any fuss or risk of costly legal disputes. 
Now that you are on our hit list you had better watch your step.

Yours spitefully and with menace,
                       Simon Mega-Bucks