impark Parking Ticket

[whetaus-tr]

Hello,

I just got issued a parking ticket on a private property of Imperial Parking Canada Corp. near Yonge & Eglinton, and I will call them tomorrow to have a discussion about this. I was just wondering what the best approach would be.






So, the meter was not there, instead, there was a new block of cement where the meter used to be. I couldn't pay, but I still left the car there. And found the following ticket when I got back:



What should be my defence if there is any ? I should have not parked where there isn't a meter to make a payment... but what are my options now ? Would they listen to my story ? Anyone with experience ?

Thanks in advance.

[turbodish]

Call them and explain the circumstances. ImPark will usually give you one freebie without much discussion if you have a plausible explanation. Second time though, they'll be aggressive about taking you through collections if you don't pay the invoice they leave on your vehicle.

[Splash]

what ever happened to the fact that these private tickets where not legal and just to ignore them?


http://wmtc.blogspot.com/2010/03/adv...s-parking.html

[short stop]

A few years back I parked downtown at an Impark lot and both machines were out of order. Sure enough, I got a ticket. I called them and explained to them the situation, and they cancelled the ticket.

Your results may vary.

[turbodish]

what ever happened to the fact that these private tickets where not legal and just to ignore them?


http://wmtc.blogspot.com/2010/03/adv...s-parking.html

Because the "ticket" is not a ticket and is in fact an invoice demanding payment for parking services used but not paid for. While you will still be able to renew your license plates if you don't pay an ImPark "ticket", that ticket represents non-payment of an enforceable contract that can end up with you being hounded by a collection agency and your credit rating damaged if you simply ignore it.

Toronto tried to pass a bylaw to make such tickets illegal several years ago, but Impark appealed to the courts that the Toronto bylaw did not apply to its lots because their signage specifically permits parking of vehicles on its lots without advance paytment (albeit at higher rates), and that their "tickets" were not tickets but demands for payment under contract law.

Ontario's Superior Courtof Justice accepted this argument and struck down Toronto's bylaw as it pertained to Impark's business model. http://canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/200...anlii17326.pdf

Toronto appealed this ruling to a higher court. The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Toronto's appeal, with the gist of its ruling in support of IMPark's position encapsulated in the following:

[46] While the signs do not contain an express statement to that effect, they do say:

Impark is by this sign offering space for public parking. You accept this offer by parking on this lot. Do not park on this lot if you do not agree to these terms and conditions … If you park and do not display a valid ticket or pass the rate is $69.55 per day or portion thereof. [Emphasis added.]

[47] In my view, the offer of space for public parking together with the statement that the rate for parking is $69.55 per day if the parker fails to display a valid ticket, are crucial provisions demonstrating Impark’s consent to parking even where proper advance payment is not made. Although the signs also say that vehicles that do not display a valid ticket may be tagged, in the context of a business offering public parking, I see no error in the application judge’s conclusion that that term, (along with the inflated parking rate) is merely one of the conditions Imparkseeks to impose in exchange for its consent to parking.
...

V. Disposition
[68] Based on the foregoing reasons, subject to clarifying the declaration if necessary in accordance with paragraph 57, I would dismiss the appeal with costs to Impark on a partial indemnity scale fixed at $20,000.00 inclusive of disbursements and applicable G.S.T.

http://canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/200...007onca649.pdf

[iFly55]

How do these people get access to classified MTO information? How can they deduce the ownership: name, address & phone numbers from Plates/VIN #?

I honestly wouldn't want to park in these lots; i wonder what happens if you remove your plates and cover your VIN#?

[bitzz]

How do these people get access to classified MTO information? How can they deduce the ownership: name, address & phone numbers from Plates/VIN #?

I honestly wouldn't want to park in these lots; i wonder what happens if you remove your plates and cover your VIN#?

MTO information is not "classified", quite the opposite.
If you park then remove your plates and obscure the vin your car gets towed as you are not allowed to park an un-plated vehicle (Read the contract on the back of the receipt or boldly displayed on site).

[gwelfmike]

these are private lots and therefore, private property, if you are parked without a permit or an expired permit the owners have every right to tow your vehicle, you are treaspassing. How would you like it if I came over to your place and parked in your driveway and left it there for the day without your permission.

How do these people get access to classified MTO information? How can they deduce the ownership: name, address & phone numbers from Plates/VIN #?

I honestly wouldn't want to park in these lots; i wonder what happens if you remove your plates and cover your VIN#?

[iFly55]

not sure if this is a loop-hole of sorts, but tow trucks require the vehicle to be cleared through police; normally they would call the non-emergency number, give the plate/VIN and request if it's "clear" to tow (if it's 10-60)

now if the plate is removed and VIN is blocked, i would guess they would require non-emergency police to arrive on site to investigate and the police would then tow the vehicle themselves; from experience, police take these calls as extremely low priority and it could take hours/days for them to arrive on site

[gwelfmike]

Depends, in some municipalities, if the private property owner has given permission for By-law officers to attend on private property, then the By-law officers can issue a "parked on private property without authority" tag and have the vehicle removed, even if it has a current plate.

[gwelfmike]

not sure if this is a loop-hole of sorts, but tow trucks require the vehicle to be cleared through police; normally they would call the non-emergency number, give the plate/VIN and request if it's "clear" to tow (if it's 10-60)

now if the plate is removed and VIN is blocked, i would guess they would require non-emergency police to arrive on site to investigate and the police would then tow the vehicle themselves; from experience, police take these calls as extremely low priority and it could take hours/days for them to arrive on site

Depends, in some municipalities, if the private property owner has given permission for By-law officers to attend on private property, then the By-law officers can issue a "parked on private property without authority" tag and have the vehicle removed, even if it has a current plate.

[Rob MacLennan]

Depends, in some municipalities, if the private property owner has given permission for By-law officers to attend on private property, then the By-law officers can issue a "parked on private property without authority" tag and have the vehicle removed, even if it has a current plate.

And if it doesn't have a plate it can be considered an abandoned vehicle, and be removed from private property with little effort.

[gwelfmike]

It actually about the same effort, in fact without plates you still have to clear the tow with the police because they want to know if it was stolen or used for crime, which takes a bit longer with a vin.

And if it doesn't have a plate it can be considered an abandoned vehicle, and be removed from private property with little effort.

[Dsquintz]

glad i found this!
I got a ticket from IMPARK the other day and dont want to pay this bullcrap.

I'm trying to fight it(with IMPARK...kinda redundant) because of the information on the ticket.
The part where it stats "lot location" has an address of "140 Jackson square" with no city or province. this address does not exist. there is a 140 jackson st E and 140 jackson st W.
the lot code when punched into the impark website brings up the correct lot address. but my "notice" does not. im disputing this because if it were a by-law ticket with the incorrect address it would've been thrown out right away...stupid impark...hate them

[whetaus-tr]

Just wanted to update:
When I called the main office for a discussion on my notice, they told me that I should e-mail to Toronto location to confirm with them that there was indeed no meter at the lot in that time. So I did, but never got an answer back from the manager. So I called the main office again today, and they 'trusted my word' and cancelled the notice for this one time =)
Also noted that if a meter is broken or out-of-order, I should call the number on the meter to make a payment; otherwise, I will have to pay the fine next time.

[Lyndsay]

It looks in your pics that there was no meter at all. How could you call the number on the meter, if it didn't exist?

[BC1100S]

glad i found this!
I got a ticket from IMPARK the other day and dont want to pay this bullcrap.

I'm trying to fight it(with IMPARK...kinda redundant) because of the information on the ticket.
The part where it stats "lot location" has an address of "140 Jackson square" with no city or province. this address does not exist. there is a 140 jackson st E and 140 jackson st W.
the lot code when punched into the impark website brings up the correct lot address. but my "notice" does not. im disputing this because if it were a by-law ticket with the incorrect address it would've been thrown out right away...stupid impark...hate them

You hate Impark because you parked on their property without paying? That's rich...

[Rob MacLennan]

You hate Impark because you parked on their property without paying? That's rich...

When you pull into a parking structure, which might be the only readily available parking in an area, you kind of expect to be paying. What do you do, when you can't? I've received tickets in Impark lots, where I parked on a regular basis, when all of their ticket machines were obviously blinking red and dead. As I parked in these lots at 6:00am, when there offices (which are out west) are closed, I could not inform anyone of the issue. On one occasion I put a note on my dash, which was ignored. What to do? They have some duty to maintain their equipment, don't you think?

[OpenGambit]

When you pull into a parking structure, which might be the only readily available parking in an area, you kind of expect to be paying. What do you do, when you can't? I've received tickets in Impark lots, where I parked on a regular basis, when all of their ticket machines were obviously blinking red and dead. As I parked in these lots at 6:00am, when there offices (which are out west) are closed, I could not inform anyone of the issue. On one occasion I put a note on my dash, which was ignored. What to do? They have some duty to maintain their equipment, don't you think?

I call force majeure on that situation.

[Rob MacLennan]

I call force majeure on that situation.

In whose favour?

Impark has attendants who check the lots, at various points in the day, to see whether people who are parked there have valid tickets on the dash. It is they, who issue the tickets. Apparently it is above their pay grade, though, to look at the ticket dispensers and see if the friendly little red error light is flashing.