Report comment

For all those crying about "naughty parkers" getting away with it;

1. the chap has paid the £85 already,
2. he admits "naughty parking"
3. this is not to be condoned

The case is about the value of the penalty levied and whether this can be justified. Yes "naughty parkers" need a penalty but the penalty must be proportionate.

Whilst I still love this case for sticking it to the man at the High Court etc, a previous writer has correctly noted the point that we have all missed - this is actually depressing because there is a system failing in that a pro bono QC and crowd-funding is required to get here. Why must that be?

All previous naught parkers have simply had to "suck up" and pay these, prima facie, extortionate and unjustifiable penalties because nobody has done what this chap is now doing.

Why would anyone (save the parking patrol companies) not want this chap's case to win? Why would anyone endorse disproportionate penalties? Would you want the death penalty re-introduced too?