Paying a PESNZ Fine in Auckland?

Forums › Off topic › Paying a PESNZ Fine in Auckland?

1 | 2

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#899431 21-Sep-2013 15:20

ajobbins: Private companies cannot fine you, they are only allowed to demand liquidated damages (That is the actual financial loss they suffered directly from your actions).

I would have to disagree on this. If you park in a private carpark then you enter into a contract with the carpark owner.

If that contract says you must pay a penalty fee if you overstay, then you agree to that by parking there. Even if you are the only car in the entire carpark and thus they suffered no financial loss.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

gregmcc

2145 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#899468 21-Sep-2013 16:22

surfisup1000:
ajobbins: Private companies cannot fine you, they are only allowed to demand liquidated damages (That is the actual financial loss they suffered directly from your actions).

I would have to disagree on this. If you park in a private carpark then you enter into a contract with the carpark owner.

If that contract says you must pay a penalty fee if you overstay, then you agree to that by parking there. Even if you are the only car in the entire carpark and thus they suffered no financial loss.

You might be right on agreeing to pay a penalty fee, but the parking company describe it as a "fine" they don't have a legal right to impose a fine, they can by law claim for actual losses and can ASK for additional fees assocated with the issue of the ticket and adminstration.

Typically the actual losess would be the cost of the overstaying the paid for time. It the excessive charges for admistration they they try and make the money on

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#899557 21-Sep-2013 22:22

gregmcc:
surfisup1000:
ajobbins: Private companies cannot fine you, they are only allowed to demand liquidated damages (That is the actual financial loss they suffered directly from your actions).

I would have to disagree on this. If you park in a private carpark then you enter into a contract with the carpark owner.

If that contract says you must pay a penalty fee if you overstay, then you agree to that by parking there. Even if you are the only car in the entire carpark and thus they suffered no financial loss.

You might be right on agreeing to pay a penalty fee, but the parking company describe it as a "fine" they don't have a legal right to impose a fine, they can by law claim for actual losses and can ASK for additional fees assocated with the issue of the ticket and adminstration.

Typically the actual losess would be the cost of the overstaying the paid for time. It the excessive charges for admistration they they try and make the money on

A 'penalty' can only amount to liquidated damages. You cannot profit from it. They can write anything they like in their contact but it doesn't mean that you're actually bound by it.

Otherwise we would see lots of companies trying this on. Eg. If you don't pay your power bill we will impose a fine of $1,000 for every minute you are late.

It's already been well established that these companies are only allowed to seek liquidated damages. The main problem is determining what those liquidated damages are. My view is that they have the right to seek nothing other than the lost parking revenue and print/postage costs. I can't think of any other expense that your infringement would incur to them that they haven't already incurred. (The cost of the staff, and the business overheads etc are sunk costs. They incur them regardless of your infringement, therefore you should have no liability for them).

Again, I would be rejecting the invoice on the basis that the parking contract exists between the carpark and the person driving the car, not the owner of the car. They will send the demand to the car owner, but they actually don't know if that was really the person driving.

Twitter: ajobbins

tardtasticx

3075 posts

Uber Geek

#903296 26-Sep-2013 19:54

Appologies for the slow replies, Ive been rather busy lately.
I've read all your replies and the brick and cheque was my favourite by far.

Unfortunately I won't be able to do it hahaha because they waved the ticket earlier this week. Was very lucky it seems.

I'll try and find a copy of what I wrote but it was just along the lines of I won't do it again it was first time etc and apologising. Tips for future reference but will definitely keep this bookmarked for future reference, if the need arrises that is :P

tardtasticx

3075 posts

Uber Geek

#903297 26-Sep-2013 19:54

resurrect

80 posts

Master Geek

#903505 27-Sep-2013 09:02

gazbo: You're being very naive. I had a debt lodged against me by another parking crowd at botany town centre for "driving off while clamped for staying over allotted time".

It was 2 years after the supposed event when I was first applying for a mortgage that I even knew the debt existed. I had no knowledge of ever being clamped let alone driving off with one still attached to my wheel. I would think I would have noticed that.

Most of the major banks would not consider a mortgage until the debt was cleared with bay corp. They didn't care I had no idea what it was for and when I did find out was intending to dispute it. I could not apply for a mortgage until it was cleared.

I only found out about the clamping after finding the lodger via Baycorp. I then had to write to the clamping company with a "please explain and remove the lodged debt or I will counter claim with damages". They then wiped the $130 debt based on time passed and no evidence kept from that time to support their claim . I had two credit card applications refused during those two years with no knowledge as to why until then..

So I'll say it again and hopefully you'll understand what I'm telling you this time without having to write a book explaining it -

Yes, they technically should not be able to lodge claims under dispute, however, in reality claims are lodged against people with little or no evidence to support the claim and it is up to the the person claimed against to do the hard work sorting it out.

one main thing about this is that a company can not legally send a debt to a "collections" company until you have been made away of it and been given a reasonable chance to pay it. also baycorp should of sent you letters saying that you had a debt, how much it was etc.

Be aware people that there is a debt collection company out there that claims to be sent a debt on behalf of the NZTA for about the cost of 1 year vehicle registration. They do this if you've gotten rid of a car without having it de-registered first. and since the NZTA didn't contact me first in regards to any of it i've just refused to pay. seems like a scam to me tbh.

1 | 2