Moral of story.....
.....and your girlfriend will pay for parking when driving your car in the future even though if you've got provable evidence it wasn't you driving there's a loophole, because it's more hassle (to you) than it's worth?
I'm 95% with you apart from
But don't be threatened into paying up if legally you don't have to.
at no point has it been denied that a parking offence was committed (OP - "So a year ago I received a parking fine for parking in a private carpark. It wasn't me driving so in scotland im not liable, it was my girlfriend") and using that loophole to get out of it still doesn't sit well.
But happy for you that all the CCJ stuff got sorted.
because it's more hassle (to you) than it's worth?
Well the hassle came from mysteriously not receiving the court summons and the resulting ccj. Otherwise it took about 15 minutes of my time to prepare my defense.
To be clear, if I'd been the driver I'd have paid, I have in the past because I acknowledged i was liable.
There is a certain smug satisfaction knowing that the whole episode resulted in the parking company out of pocket.
and using that loophole to get out of it still doesn't sit well.
Fair enough, if you feel morally you should pay a private parking co 120 odd quid for 2 hrs parking then that's your call. Feel free to pay
I suspect the majority of the population wouldn't be of such a mindset
Thing is, if the original fine had been more reasonable, say £ 30 quid, ie similar to a council ticket, I'd have probably just paid it.
How do "the majority of the population" feel about other forms of theft? Tesco make enough, they can afford it, and if you get caught just pay what you should have done in the first place, or a little bit more.
Beavis vs Parking Eye, the penalty can't be 'unconscionable' but is allowed to be enough to disincentivise committing the offence.
oh..And probably don't ask for legal advice on stw..
I feel this is the most salient point of the whole thread. And I'm sure I popped my two'penneth early doors too. 😁
Otherwise it took about 15 minutes of my time to prepare my defense.
Rather you than me.
I'm not sure it was ever asked....did your girlfriend consciously not pay for parking or was it an error (didn't realise it wasn't a free car park or accidentally overstayed).
I'm also unsure from your answer if (given your success) her driving your car and not paying when you are provably elsewhere is going to be a 'tactic' in the future if it's not really any great hassle.
How do "the majority of the population" feel about other forms of theft?
Well it's clearly not classed as 'theft' because it's a civil matter.
another loophole, based on it being contract law but the point i think remains.
and FWIW a business can still claim for theft even if a public prosecution is not pursued, so it can still be theft as a civil matter.
asked....did your girlfriend consciously not pay for parking or was it an error
I have no idea what goes through her mind tbh. She claimed she didn't realise. In her defence she usually does pay! I suspect she simply forgot as she was rushing to a hair appointment.
I'm also unsure from your answer if (given your success) her driving your car and not paying when you are provably elsewhere is going to be a 'tactic' in the future if it's not really any great hassle.
Good question. I think she made a mistake and she should absolutely be paying for parking, it costs a few quid.
Honest answer...if it happened again I'd probably dob her in purely to teach her a lesson. But not out of any moral duty to the parking company.
another loophole
Not really, the 2 things aren't the same at all.
In criminal law, theft isn’t just about taking something; it’s about taking it dishonestly and on purpose.
So to convert's point, you may have a point if she deliberately avoided paying. But I have no reason to believe she did that. I think it was an honest mistake
How do "the majority of the population" feel about other forms of theft? Tesco make enough, they can afford it, and if you get caught just pay what you should have done in the first place, or a little bit more.
another loophole, based on it being contract law but the point i think remains.
What is actually your issue here? For all the noise you've made on this thread, are you now just being salty because he won?
The OP complied with Scottish Law and a court has just agreed with him. Fin. You might not like the law but, well, so what? There is no moral case to be made here because the law doesn't give a stuff about morals, it cares about the law.
If the case were the other way around, the OP had broken the law and was claiming "well, the law is unfair!" as a defence, do you suppose the judge would have gone "quite right son, off you go"?
and FWIW a business can still claim for theft even if a public prosecution is not pursued, so it can still be theft as a civil matter
I assume they'd still need to prove intent. Either way, they clearly didn't do that, which suggests they don't think not paying parking tickets is theft either!
I appreciate you think I should have paid, no issues with that stance at all. But I think it's a leap to go from forgetting to pay a parking ticket to theft!
I appreciate you think I should have paid, no issues with that stance at all. But I think it's a leap to go from forgetting to pay a parking ticket to theft!
The bit where the line got crossed is not in forgetting to pay, it was when the error was flagged up and you could have either paid or provided the details of the person liable to pay. Instead you used a loophole. OK, theft is an emotive word and indicates intent, but you did intentionally not pay when given the opportunity, no?
The extra costs because the opportunity to pay on time for a reduced cost was 'missed' makes this a bigger matter of course and incentivises further to use the loophole as it's now £120 or whatever vs the £30 it could have been, but that's not really on the PPC that the docs didn't reach you.
[edit - in fact scrap that second bit, from the OP seems you always intended to use the loophole even when the penalty was more reasonable]
So a year ago I received a parking fine for parking in a private carpark. It wasn't me driving so in scotland im not liable, it was my girlfriend. I am the legal owner of the car but was at work at the time and can prove it. I wrote to them telling then I wasn't driving, i could prove I wasn't (I was working at the time), and I was under no obligation under Scottish law to disclose the driver.
Moral of story, don't ignore parking charges. But don't be threatened into paying up if legally you don't have to.oh..And probably don't ask for legal advice on stw..
I think you got advice that is consistent with your outcome as well as advice that is not. In that sense STW is always right!
at no point has it been denied that a parking offence was committed (OP - "So a year ago I received a parking fine for parking in a private carpark. It wasn't me driving so in scotland im not liable, it was my girlfriend") and using that loophole to get out of it still doesn't sit well.
Personally I wouldn't call it a loophole. In Scotland (at the moment at least) the parking company enter a contract with the driver. If you enter a contract with someone and want to enforce it, it is always your job to establish who it was with and enforce it against that party, and there's no obligation on a registered keeper to make that easy for them. There are ways to manage car parks that don't revolve around making profit this way. If you are stupid enough to set up your business model based on unenforceable law then you deserve to lose sometimes.
The extra costs because the opportunity to pay on time for a reduced cost was 'missed' makes this a bigger matter of course and incentivises further to use the loophole as it's now £120 or whatever vs the £30 it could have been, but that's not really on the PPC that the docs didn't reach you.
[edit - in fact scrap that second bit, from the OP seems you always intended to use the loophole even when the penalty was more reasonable]
Um no, you are just making stuff up now. The fine was never £30 quid, if it had been I'd have probably paid it. It was £160, reduced to £120 if I paid within 14 days.
OK, theft is an emotive word and indicates intent, but you did intentionally not pay when given the opportunity, no?
I was given the opportunity to pay a fine 40 times the value of the parking that my OH forgot to pay. And that i wasn't liable for.
If you think that's equivalent to theft then fair enough..
Wins the case.
Loses rule #1.
If your definition of being a dick is not paying £120 quid to a private parking company when i didn't need to, then I'm all good with that.
I think I said earlier in the thread I'd rather burn the money than give it to them. And whilst I won't be doing that, I have donated the money saved to a much more worthy cause, my local dog rescue centre.
My mistake, I read your earlier post wrong and didn't go back and check. It wasn't plucked from thin air.
Thing is, if the original fine had been more reasonable, say £ 30 quid
Mod - thread appears to have run its course, so closing.