Independent Tribunal - Parking and Tollways (business practices tantamount to extortion )

23rd February 2016, Dissatisfied Parking & Toll-way Customers Petition

To the people behind the parking and toll-way online appeal computers, we have all due respect for you because jobs are hard to come by in these difficult economic times.   Our petition letter isn’t to you.

Dear executives of parking and toll-way businesses,

We are confident that at times we have an honest but (from your perspective) perhaps a mistaken belief there wouldn’t have been an issue in relation to where we parked or had driven. We would tell you why we feel this way but as your appeal system is a SHAM, what would be the point?     The word  ‘appeal’ is commonly taken to mean that a person has already been convicted in a court or tribunal for which those that judge are independent to the plaintiff and respondent, and in particular, the enforcer.  We understand that it’s a Westminster system of governance to separate the powers of the enforcers, judicial, and lawmakers.    

Case in point the self-serving rules system of parking imposed by Wilson Parking is Napoleonic because they dictate not only the alleged contract but also those that judge an appeal may be unduly influenced.  Note: appeal registrar www.pesau.com.au is who? Wilson Parking.

You cannot be a ‘parking authority’ unless you operate under a statute law (regulated parking), therefore you cannot issue a ‘parking breach notice’ and attach it to our windscreen i.e. fine.  

We draw your attention to the 2012 Victorian Supreme Court ruling. Ace Parking and its officers, were fined and ordered to stop using misleading tactics tantamount to pretending they were an ‘authority’.

We also draw your attention to the “liquidated damages” clause on the paper you attach to our windscreens claiming a ‘breach’ of YOUR rules. The common law of “distress damage feasant” is the basis of claims by Australian parking operators when attempting to recover costs from parking and perhaps toll-way customers. However, this common law was intended to aid people whose land was damaged by wandering livestock.

If a horse or cow strayed onto your estate in 15th century England, common law let you or your representative seize the animal (they had no cars in those days) and demand payment from the animal’s owner for any damage done to crops.  As we don’t drive over any crops nor damage anything (not even a blade of grass) we do not know what it is that you are referring to that required ‘liquidation’ as a result of ‘damage’?   

Do not hobble our vehicles with a wheel clamp or have them led away on a tow truck.  If you happen to see our vehicles grazing in a parking bay it does not stray unless stolen.

We draw your attention to the courts that have a problem applying this common law to private parking disputes.   Former High Court judge Peter Quilliam said it would be preferable if a remedy came from Parliament and not the courts and this is why this is called a petition letter.  

England and Wales, from where this common law originated, do not accept your interpretation of liquidated damages.   Scotland banned wheel clamping and towing as far back as 1992. An appeal court described the practice as tantamount to extortion and theft.   

A written threat to wheel clamp or tow people’s vehicles away if they don’t agree with your decision regarding a dispute is akin to having a large man in a uniform with a wheel clamp in one hand and a sign in the other that reads “Pay up or else”.  We disagree with your intimidation.  

The amount you seek for recovery of alleged costs is ridiculous. An appraisal by a lawyer said a reasonable cost would be “about $10”.  So if you wish to avoid that cost do not buy a postage stamp and envelope, and have your employee send your letter of demand to us for the recovery of your alleged ‘liquidated costs’ as we have a valid reason for not wishing to pay you.   

We support the Westminster system of law and it is obvious that you do not. This is the second reason why we won’t be paying you a cent while we are in dispute with you over an alleged ‘breach’. If a debt collector contacts us on your behalf, we are going to mail them a copy of this letter along with our ‘letters of demand’ to recover $10.

So in conclusion let us be absolutely clear to you as to our petition in this matter:

Firstly, there is no independent court or tribunal of appropriate jurisdiction to consider if your alleged ‘Parking Breach Notice’ was justifiable in the first instance;

Secondly, a small claims court has no jurisdiction to determine if there was an ‘honest but mistake belief that had the circumstances been correct, no alleged ‘breach’ would occurred; and  

Lastly, if you should ever interfere with our vehicle(s) we will sue you for about a week’s wage i.e. our loss time from work, and a rental car to get to and from work while you had our animal vehicle hobbled and/or led away.

We call upon you to also demand from the Government that public submissions be called nationwide for the creation of legislation titled: ‘private regulated parking’. Legislation we hope will achieve a balance of rights between those that park and use toll roads and those that offer parking and toll roads because we believe as motorists the rights are presently one sided. Legislation we hope will be inclusive of an independent tribunal to hear disputes.

As a related issue, we do not believe this legislation should create a traffic offence for those that have not paid a parking or toll-way debt after recovery costs have been applied. This is because we feel that those hard on their luck that can not readily pay a parking or toll way debt should not lose demerit points off their license or lose their license as this is ‘double punishment’.

Our position is that non-payment of parking or a toll way debt is a civil matter not a traffic offence.  We feel that people that work low paying jobs should never lose their license if they can not readily pay their debts because they need their license to pay for parking and tolls, as well as for food and shelter of their families.  

Signed:

{petition of names attached}

Dissatisfied Parking and Toll-way Customers