QC wins legal battle after he was fined for nap in car park
A TOP lawyer who was fined £85 for stopping to nap at a motorway service station has won his court case against a parking firm.
ParkingEye took Nicholas Bowen QC to court after he refused to pay the parking ticket for exceeding the free two-hour limit at Membury Services on the M4 in Berkshire.
But the firm, which brags of winning 90 per cent of its county court hearings, was ordered to pay £1,550 in legal costs when the judge dismissed the case.
Mr Bowen argued the company had no legal right to sue people who parked in an empty service station car park at night to take a nap.
He also said it was a breach of consumer protection law, and that he hoped ParkingEye would “learn a lesson from losing the case”.
Mr Bowen took a break at about midnight while driving from Hereford to his London home in May last year.
He overstayed in the “virtually empty” Welcome Break car park by 20 minutes and insisted there were no signs with parking information where he stopped his car. The barrister said: “I woke up at about 2.20am and, feeling refreshed, drove home.”
But ParkingEye claimed he by 35 minutes.
Mr Bowen said signs making reference to 24-hour charging were in tiny print in another part of the car park.
He said it would have been “far easier” to pay the ticket but he decided to stand up to the firm on a “public interest basis”.
ParkingEye, owned by Capita, has taken more than 60,000 cases to county courts against motorists in the past three years. When the claim against Mr Bowen came to court, ParkingEye was not present.
In an email to the company, Mr Bowen said: “It is a pretty poor show that, having issued proceedings, overstayed Nicholas Bowen refused to pay charge ParkingEye lacked the courage of its convictions or confidence to even turn up to the small claims court to argue about the commercial and legal justification for your business model.
“My defence was that your contract was unenforceable and that you have no legal right to charge members of the public for night parking in service station car parks.”
The barrister also accused ParkingEye of “indulging in pernicious bullying tactics” against motorists and claimed it was relying “either on apathy, or that most of your victims lack the ability or funds to fight back”.
He added: “I hope ParkingEye will learn a lesson from losing this case, reconsider your contractual terms and change what is an unlawful and unconscionable practice.”
ParkingEye said it did send a representative to court but was told that the case was not on the list of hearings. It added that it was “considering its options within the time limits set out by the court”.