DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 116639--------------------------------------------------
       Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
   DIR By: InterCity125
       Date: April 22, 2026, 1:53 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I agree with the above.
       You could also counter their argument regarding the
       non-nomination of an alternative driver with the argument
       presented in your WS.
       JB's assertion regarding compliance with 9(2)(f) is totally
       unsupported and the required wording is clearly specified in the
       statute - why does the Claimant feel that this wording is not
       needed when the legislation says that it does?
       They don't address the 'time on site' argument - you did not
       demand a 5 min free (consideration) period at the start of your
       parking session - it was the operator who calculated the 'expiry
       time' when you offered payment - if the operator wished to price
       their service based on 'time on site' then their computer
       software could easily do that - it's your confirmation of
       contract which will be central to the argument.
       Good to see that they rolled over on the admission of who was
       driving - the Court will note this.
       In his additional WS, JB makes a very basic miscalculation of
       the overstay - he says that it was 17 minutes but this is not
       the case.
       #Post#: 117649--------------------------------------------------
       Re: VCS - Parked after expiry time - Powis Car Park, Woolwich
   DIR By: m_odwong@hotmail.com
       Date: May 3, 2026, 11:03 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Unfortunately the judge ruled in their favour.
       She reasoned that they complied with Pofa as the NtK included
       the various statutes and they are allowed to paraphrase, and
       apparently that sentence within brackets isn't strictly
       required. Does anyone know if there are cases where judges have
       ruled otherwise for exactly the same worded Ntk's?
       The judge also ruled the signs were clear enough as they state
       the contract is with VCS.
       *****************************************************
       Page 6 of 6
   DIR Previous Page