I was enjoying a quiet rake through the papers today after an enjoyable Sunday lunch at my in-laws’ (all the tastier because we’ve been sans kitchen for a week - I’m fitting a new one), when I came across the following story, which irritated me more than it probably should:
Judge quashes £300 parking fine…because it set out to ‘frighten and intimidate’ driver
By MARTIN DELGADO
Mail on Sunday
22nd March 2008
Car park operators could be forced to stop threatening motorists with huge penalty charges after a landmark court ruling.
In a decision that will be welcomed by many aggrieved drivers, a judge has ruled that the demands for hundreds of pounds in penalties which a parking company sent to one woman driver were illegal because they were too high.
The court was told they were intended to “frighten or intimidate” her rather than compensate the firm for any lost income.
And what’s the problem with this small victory for the oppressed motorist, I hear you ask? Well, nothing, but just look at that sign!
This follows an article on page 5 of yesterday’s Daily Telegraph regarding a VW ad which appears to show a dog in distress, the final sentence of which read, “It’s welfare was paramount throughout the shoot.”
Grrrr.
’nuff said.
