A Cupra Born owner complained if he had been the victim of an armed robbery. All to avoid a parking fine of DKK 420.
An owner of a Cupra Born electric car bragged about having been involved in an armed robbery to avoid a parking fine of 420 Danish kroner.
The episode took place one afternoon in March in Gjovik, Norway, where he had parked the car in an area with 45 minutes of free parking provided the car's number plate was registered.
When the car owner returned to his car, he had exceeded the time limit and an Aimo Park parking officer had issued a control charge.
Instead of paying the fine, the man complained to both the parking company and the Parking Complaints Board, which deals with disputes between parking companies and motorists.
That's what Motor writes.
READ ALSO: Audi gives up – sells Formula 1 team to Qatar
As part of his complaint, the car owner claimed he had been delayed because he had helped apprehend an offender during an armed robbery at a nearby Kiwi store. He claimed he had assisted until the police arrived.
The parking company investigated the case and could not find any information about such a robbery in Gjovik on the day in question. They discovered instead that the incident he was referring to had happened over two years earlier and more than 500 kilometers away in Tau, Rogaland.
In January 2022, there was an incident in Tau where a man pulled a knife during an attempt to steal ol from a Kiwi shop. This was far from both the time and place for the current parking stall. The parking company therefore assessed that the car owner had deliberately tried to mislead them and called for the stall to be cancelled.
The Parking Complaint Board rejected the man's complaint and determined that the fine of DKK 420 should be maintained.
In addition, he was ordered to pay an additional DKK 320 to cover the parking company's costs in connection with the case. Such extra fees are given only rarely and only in cases of deliberate abuse of the complaint system.
However, the Consumer Council's representative on the board disagreed and believed that the case was not serious enough to justify an extra fee. However, the board upheld the decision, considering that the car owner had changed his story several times and acted in bad faith to avoid paying the fine.
