SOME Launceston people face bankruptcy proceedings over enforced payment of parking fees backdated nearly five years by a national car park company.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Care Park managing director Robert Belteky confirmed yesterday that some of those among the thousands issued with payment notice reminders in the past fortnight could be bankrupted if forced to pay the payment notices.
And Care Park media relations manager Yolanda Torrisi reiterated that the company intended to vigorously pursue the payment defaulters.
But Rosevears MLC Kerry Finch called on Care Park to show leniency and waive backdated notices.
Launceston lawyer Darrel Grey suggested that vehicle owners should look carefully at the wording of the letters and seek legal advice before acting on them.
Mr Belteky said that the hard line on Care Park non-fee-paying customers came after the company had lost an estimated $1 million in the past five years to people from the Launceston area not responding to payment notices.
"It has taken Care Park several years and hundreds of thousands of dollars in court and legal fees to obtain vehicle registration details which have now been granted," he said.
Ms Torrisi said that the company had issued about 1000 payment notice reminders last week and expected to post off the same number this week with more to come after that.
She said that the biggest single amount owing was $5000 and the lowest $150.
"They have only been sent to people who have multiple parking amounts owing," she said.
Mr Finch said that the move had affected hundreds of young people in particular.
"Their actions can be seen as cavalier but the urban myth was that the fines would never be followed through," he said.
"There is a duty of care on the part of Care management to prevent these users from suddenly being landed with bills of thousands of dollars."
"We don't want bankruptcy to be part of the collateral damage."
Mr Grey said that the letters that people were receiving were typical of those issued for debt collection.
"In so far as (the payment reminder) appears to be a fine, it is deceptive and misleading. It is not a demand for payment," he said.
He said the company would have to take legal proceedings against those who refused to respond to the payment reminders.
