Rul­ing shows mo­torists should park with care

The Scotsman - - Around Scotland -

Un­like Penalty Charge No­tices is­sued by traf­fic war­dens and po­lice, tick­ets is­sued by pri­vate park­ing firms are not reg­u­lated or backed by leg­is­la­tion.

But the Mackie case set a le­gal prece­dent, demon­strat­ing that if a mo­torist parks in a re­stricted pri­vate area, with sig­nage ad­vis­ing of re­stric­tions and charges, they are agree­ing to en­ter into a con­tract with the com­pany.

Should they fall foul of the terms, then fail to pay up, they can be found to be in breach.

Some firms, such as Park­ing Eye, now cite Sher­iff Way’s judge­ment on their web­sites. How­ever, Ms Mackie, ran up a sig­nif­i­cant bill by re­peat­edly re­fused to pay up; in re­al­ity, pri­vate park­ing firms will only pur­sue a driver if it is cost-ef­fec­tive.

Driv­ers in Scot­land are also ex­empt from the Pro­tec­tion of Free­doms Act 2012, which means reg­is­tered keep­ers of ve­hi­cles are un­der no obli­ga­tion to say who was driv­ing at the time.

In or­der for a park­ing firm to suc­ceed in any court case, it must be able to prove who was be­hind the wheel.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.