Car park fine

I was interested to read that parking people were writing down rego numbers as my dispute with ANCP is that my car has never been in their car park. I believe they got the wrong rego number, then got the details from VicRoads to send their notice out. It could be more devious as it is not difficult to know the sequence of any state's rego numbers and just ask the rego authority for details and send out notices to anyone! They must surely get a few people in by the mere fact that most people live in the capital city and when the notices are sent out more than twelve months after the alleged offence, it is possible they could think they were legitimate. Anyway ANCP ignored my correspondence to them and I received letters and phone calls from Dunn and Bradstreet so I told them I was very angry about the whole scam and I have emailed them all relevant correspondence I have had with proof I was at work more than 100 kilometres from the car park in question on that day.    They said they would take up my case with ANCP. They didn't know anything about the dodgy-looking lawyer letter that follows the NIS and precedes their letters. I have not heard from them since.

Hi Shikhee

My partner has received a Notice of Intention to Sue from ANCP for apparently parking at Barkly Square in March 2008. Did your lawyer housemate take photos of the signage by any chance?

Thanks!

Yes, I too have just received a letter from Dun And Bradstreet. So far everything has been going along sweetly. Ignored their first letter, ignored their letter from some solicitor (it looked more like a circular). But now this. Not sure what to do. Like yourself ejm I don't want my credit rating affected. One thing I do know for sure, I don't want to pay these thugs.

Update on Care Park North Queensland.

I contacted a cop friend who advised that QLD rego details are not given out to private car parking companies.
Spoke to Main Roads QLD who immediately launched a FOI/Invasion of privacy investigation.
Received threatening letter in mail for court proceedings....bahahah!!!

If you are in QLD please contact Main Roads QLD for FOI/Invasion of privacy

I'm the owner of a vehicle that the scumbag known as ANCP claims did not have a valid ticket displayed *over two years ago*.

The scumbags have used a process known as preliminary discovery which allows them to seek an order from a court to identify 'prospective defendants'. Unfortunately, the Privacy Act (Cth) does not apply in such circumstances because the release is authorised by law.

http://www.aipd.com.au/pdf/MEMORANDUM_Richard_Thomas_RTA_v_National_Car_Parks.pdf details nicely the NSW court process...

Essentially, VicRoads was forced to cough up owners' (but not, of course DRIVERS') details. The scumbag known as ANCP then wrote to me as the 'registered owner/driver', to which I responded coughing to the fact I was the registered owner (it's hard to dispute VicRoads data so don't) while pointing out that ANCP did not include any evidence to suggest I was the driver at the time and hence requesting ANCP pursue this matter with the driver.

I also pointed to both the lack of privity of contract between an owner of a vehicle and a scumbag, and the fact that if they commence proceedings, I can have them moved to VCAT because the matter is a 'consumer and trader dispute' relating to 'parking services' (essentially meaning it will cost them well in excess of $88 to recover the $88 they seek in (in terrorem) liquidated damages). I then told them to cease and desist or take me to VCAT within 14 days (i.e. put up or shut up). There has been no response so far...

Edited by surroundfan - 08/September/2009 at 17:13

Cammyron

The general advice about these 'fines' is to ignore, ignore and ignore some more (unless of course like me, you wish to hone your legal drafting skills with very few consequences). The private car park operators ('scumbags') rely on bullsh*t, bluff and bluster to get people to pay up.

Some things to bear in mind:

1) Your claim will probably be heard as a small claim (under $10k) at VCAT as a 'consumer-trader dispute' (the scope of this power is very wideranging). Under cl 28GG of Schedule 1 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act, VCAT cannot make an order for costs for small claims proceedings in virtually all cases (the only exception is where one party fails to show up and then seeks a rehearing - see s 120 VCAT Act), so the $75 in 'legal costs' claimed won't be able to be ordered by the court. In addition, the scumbags won't be allowed legal representation at the hearing (although nor will you). As such, it will cost the scumbags $36.20 to take you to VCAT, which comes straight out of the $88 they claim you owe. You may as well wait for them to take action, rather than coughing up $36.20 of your own hard-earned to get out of a contract you probably didn't enter, and which has liquidated damages clauses that constitute unfair penalties.

EDIT 1A) The scumbags can only appeal to the Supreme Court on a question of law (s 148 VCAT Act) and only if the Supreme Court gives leave. Therefore, the likelihood of any further action being taken after VCAT is minimal.

2) If the scumbags try and issue proceedings in a court (i.e. not VCAT), you can use s 112A of the Fair Trading Act to have the hearing moved to the small claims list at VCAT (meaning no costs orders, and no lawyers, and hence a very desirable course of action for a consumer). You must do this BEFORE ANY HEARING, which requires you to act swiftly, and you must place the amount in dispute ($88) in trust with VCAT until the matter is resolved. In addition, if a hearing has commenced, you can request that the court stay the proceedings and have the matter heard under s 112 of the Fair Trading Act, although this is up to the discretion of the court.

3) Unless you get a judgment debt (i.e. an amount ordered by a court), non-payment will not affect your credit history because this is not a credit contract and no 'credit default' will be recorded. It is, however, important to pay an amount ordered by VCAT for this reason.

4) Under no circumstances should you use the 'appeals' mechanism of the scumbags. This merely gives them evidence to work with against you in the unlikely event it is taken to court.

5) If the matter is referred to a debt collector, you should inform the debt collector that the matter is in dispute and to refer it back to the principal. You may need to write a letter back to the debt collector to that effect. If they continue to contact you, remind them of the ACCC/ASIC Debt Collection Code of Practice.

6) Under NO circumstances inform the scumbags of who the driver is unless under oath in VCAT. They can only contact the owner of the vehicle. However, any alleged contract will be with the driver.

If anyone gets taken to court or VCAT, I will elaborate on the myriad of arguments that can be used to defend these claims. However, there is little risk of this occurring.

Edited by surroundfan - 01/September/2009 at 14:14

Hi Guys

Attention NSW residents

I have received another letter, this time it’s from the DEBY RECOVERY DIVISON:
As usual, the number on the letter is an answering machine and then after allot of search engine thanks to the internet. I have collected some useful information. Make yourself familiar with the following contacts.

Regards,
The Power

The Lawyer is
Diacopoulos J A ( John. A)
his number is switchboard (02) 92649 509 and his mobile is 0418 644 957
Address: 160 Castlereagh St
Sydney NSW 2000

To Susan Cameron
I'm in and would love to see this company stopped. I'm in Victoria and have history with ANCP and the lawyer and have direct numbers! I do not know if the lawyer holds a practicing certificate from the NSW Law Society but I have the letter on Intention to Sue from him with address and tracked down his direct number.

You can email me at tanya.askey@gmail.com
Cheers
Tanya

Hi Andy,
So did you tell them that you wouldn't be divulging the details of the driver or just ignore it? I'm not sure what to do next. Did they drop it after that?

Thank you for your help!

No, you do NOT have to tell them who was driving. They cannot force you to disclose that fact and have no legal right to assert that you must tell them the name of the driver. We consulted with a lawyer when my Mother received letters and she said she was not the driver (true) and they tried to demand that she tell them and we refused. They also ignored a request to send all correspondence to our laywers in future.

Bunch of arseholes! (Excuse my language).

I cannot believe that Consumer Affairs say they cannot do anything about these guys. They clearly have set up a business model to trick/confuse people and then try and threaten and scare them buy issuing fake fines. If they really wanted to be fair, they would install boom gates which forced you to get a ticket, but they do not want to do that as that cuts into revenue.