Private Parking Companies/Charges - Advice Paper (everything you need to know)

[demon_x_slash]

lol thanks barra - my bumping fingers were getting tired

[notmuchofacontributor]

Very comprehensive advice Pete. Very useful to find it all in one place together.

One other criminal law aspect that has occurred to me is the Trade Descriptions Act 1968, s.14. This would relate to the 'official' looking nature of the invoices designed to fool people into thinking they are PCN's. At least one clamping firm has been prosecuted in the past for being called 'London Borough Parking' or similar and using an 'official' looking crest. It is enforced by your local Trading Standards Service, and reported to them via the call-centre Consumer Direct: 08454 040506.

Other aspects that occassionally crop up relate to the charges. If they display £60 on the sign but charge you more then there may be Trading Standards offences under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 Part III, s.20. And if they charge a credit card surcharge and this is not made clear beforehand then there is an offence under the methods of payment Regs. It is always worth also considering (as an add on) the offences under the Companies Act 2006 relating to having their company name and address on all invoices.

[Guardian Angel]

BPA Initiative to End Rogue Ticketing

I thought I'd post this again here in case you haven't already read it:

Just wondered if you guys knew that The British Parking Association (BPA) http://www.britishparking.co.uk/index.php?path=1,240 to quote:
'BPA has just recently been given the responsibility of being the only parking organisation with official DVLA accreditation and is looking at initiatives to prevent motorists receiving high-priced, unregulated tickets. From October 2007, the DVLA will release vehicle registration information only to those companies which are members of an Accredited Trade Association. Members that do not comply with the terms of their Code could have their BPA membership initially suspended, and possibly terminated'

Basically the more people that inform the BPA of breaches in the code by private parking companies (in particulary UKPC Ltd in my case) the more chance the company will be investigated. Without access to Reg keeper/owner information from the DVLA, the company can not operate.

How many of you know that under new BPA Code guidelines, standard charges for a parking ticket issued on private land should not exceed £75, and the maximum charge shall not exceed £150. UKPC Ltd charge £85 and £170 if not paid within 14 days. There is a list of BPA codes that members must adhere to.
Please write to BPA with all your correspondence (only if the private parking company is a member of BPA) - if they get lots of complaints from the public they will have to investigate them.
G.A

[RAZOR1965]

Thanks to all for a good read

I have received a 'Formal Demand Before Court Action' letter from Central Ticketing. The letter just states that they want money. No actual alleged contract term being breached (ie no offence detailed). I sent them a letter like:


"I have received a letter of correspondence from yourselves dated 14th May 2007. This letter / demand is asking me to pay £85 for some unspecified event.

I should remind you that as the owner of a vehicle I personally cannot be held responsible for any contract allegedly agreed to or implied by any other driver of my vehicle. As such I see your charge as unlawful, unenforceable and I am not liable. I will not be providing any payment and your continued pursuit of this matter will constitute an offence under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997. I consider the matter closed and am explicitly instructing you not to contact me again for any reason.

Yours finally"

I am quite sure they will continue to demand money. My question is, does anybody have any knowledge what their next/eventual steps are? How many letters? Debt collection agencies? Actual court process?



Many thanks

[tomtubby]

Pleased to have found this area of the site as I have just received a parking ticket for parking in a university car park.....and I had a valid ticket. I now know what to do thank you.

[demon_x_slash]

Glad to hear it. Universities are one of the worst 'offenders' for private fining, and it's disgraceful. A lot of us live on the breadline, to very tight budgets, and the charges we get from the institution that's meant to be facilitating our education are actually very detrimental. Library fines are massively disproportionate too.

The favourite trick for Universities is actually to increase its student intake by building new halls and offering a wider range of courses (which also compromises timetable space and educational quality), and then reduce the size of their existing car parks by at least a third. I know of at least two that have done this in the past three years. I may be of the tinfoil hat brigade, but I smell a rat...

[Bacon&egg]

I will keep you updated on this one.
Received a letter telling me that I was being referred to a firm of debt collectors by a company running a railway car park. The date of the alleged offence being nearly one year ago! It didn't even say which car park it was, but on the phone they did say which it was.
No previous knowledge of a ticket, no previous contact from the company involved (Apcoa) and when asked if the evidence could be made available told me I'd have to pay them £10 in fees!
Simply replied that I would see them in court. They claim to have photographic evidence which will be interesting. I also have the parking permit covering that period. They claim it was not displayed. I wonder if they have access to photoshop?
According to the rail company they are obliged to write to the owner of the vehicle within 3 working days of getting the details from DVLA. I know DVLA is busy, but nearly a years delay!?
Of course by not informing the vehicle owner he/she won't know about the penalty and the option to pay just £30 instead of the whopping great £120 they are trying to extort out of me.
The debt agency is sending the matter back to Apcoa, but they refuse to speak with me as it is in the hands of the debt collectors, and the penalty is going up again.
So I await the court action, which I have a feeling may not happen.
I'm a bloke with a good grounding in law and a paid off mortgage, so such things don't intimidate me. But how many simply get bullied into paying through fear their credit rating will be zeroed?
Will post any developments.

[skeetabomb]

Hi,
Just got a "PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE" from National Car Parks Ltd for and on behalf of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea for reason 05P: Parked after expiry of paid for time in a pay and display bay.

1. I was unloading a tea-chest sized box weighing 28.5 kgs and posting it in the Royal Mail office 20m around the corner. It took much longer in the post office than expected as the PO staffer was a bit stumped as to how to deal with such a large item being sent to Tanzania (where post codes are apparently not used!);

2. The hand-written signature on the notice is questionable at best - it is simply a short wavey line, about 1 inch in length, not deviating from a straight line more than about 3-4mm and slightly ascending. How this can be deemed an acceptable hand-written signature is beyond me. I cannot find anything stating what the regulations are regarding the hand-signing of these Penalty Charge Notices are.;

3. The notice claims to be issued under "The Road Traffic Act 1991 (as amended)", which I have looked up online at Road Traffic Act 1991 (c. 40), Section 44 (Parking Attendants) of which reads as follows:

44.—(1) After section 63 of the [1984 c. 27.] Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, there shall be inserted—
Parking attendants
Parking attendants.

63A. — (1) A local authority may provide for the supervision of parking places within their area by individuals to be known as parking attendants.

(2) Parking attendants shall also have such other functions in relation to stationary vehicles as may be conferred by or under any other enactment.

(3) A parking attendant shall be—

• (a) an individual employed by the authority; or

• (b) where the authority have made arrangements with any person for the purposes of this section, an individual employed by that person to act as a parking attendant.

(4) Parking attendants in Greater London shall wear such uniform as the Secretary of State may determine when exercising prescribed functions, and shall not exercise any of those functions when not in uniform.

(5) In this section "local authority" and "parking place" have the meanings given by section 32(4) of this Act.
"

(2) In section 35 of that Act (provisions as to use of parking places provided under section 32 or 33), subsection (9) shall be omitted.

a) I cannot be certain beyond all doubt that this act (in it's current state, as available online and as partially quoted above) is exactly the same and specifies the exact same regulations, penalties and requirements etc. as that referred to on the notice, since that referred to on the notice includes the words "(as amended)". This is ambiguous;

b)This Act refers to the "Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984", which I have not been able to find available online to check.
I believe that it is a basic human right that any law or regulation that is in force in whole or in part (i.e. not wholly superseded, invalidated or nullified by subsequent legislation) should be freely available for those to whom it is applicable, or those on whom it may be enforced, to review;

c) according to the act quoted above, it is unlawful for PCNs to be issued by anyone other than an employee of the Local Authority or a person employed by a PERSON with whom that Local Authority has an 'arrangement' for these purposes. A company is not a PERSON, therefore, if the above quoted clauses are what is currently in force, it is illegal for any organisation other than the Local Authority or such a specifically designated person to issue a PCN.

I would like to contest this on the basis of one or more of the following:

a) I question the authenticity of the PCN, since I consider the hand-signature to be invalid due to it's over simplicity and forgeability. I want the issuing officer to prove it to be valid by comparing it to their standard signature, as would be used on cards and other agreements etc.;
b) it appears the "(as amended)" version is not available for me (and the public) to review and is therefore unfair;
c) the above-quoted clauses refer to an earlier act that is also not available for review;
d) I was unloading a large and heavy object from my vehicle to post and the excess time that my vehicle was in the pay-and-display parking bay beyond the paid-for-time was about 10 minutes and much less than 20 minutes;
e) if the act I have quoted above is valid, then it is illegal for National Car Parks Ltd to be issuing these PCNs.

I hope that the above information is useful for others. I am convinced that Parking Wardens/Attendants wear hats to conceal two small horns...

QUESTION: What do you think my chances are?

Many thanks in advance,

Skeetabomb.

[demon_x_slash]

Could you post the wording of the ticket, skeeta, on your own thread in the parking forum? And please verify if this is a Council-run or private car park.

[sequenci]

Here is the act you were looking for:

Results within legislation - Statute Law Database

[skeetabomb]

It was a pay and display kerbside parking bay out on a public street, so it would be the council who is in charge, but the council has some arrangement with NCP such that NCP employ the parking wardens to roam the streets, preying on unsuspecting drivers.

Most of the relevant text on the ticket is in my first post - the title, the reference to the Act, the reason for the PCN. It is clearly entitled a "Penalty Charge Notice".

[Guardian Angel]

Hi Skeetabomb
Don't mean to upset you but I can't see how you can get out of this one, the Council seem to be following the correct guidelines. If you look up the councils website on parking issues you will see they do actually give a full description of their parking terms and conditions:
http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/Environmental...lscriteria.pdf

Code 05P does allow a grace period of 5 minutes before issuing a PCN -you state you were parked for an excess time of between 10-20 minutes -therefore I don't really think you have any grounds to challenge this. Local Authories are covered by the Road Traffic Act 1991 (whereby parking enforcement was taken out of the hands of the Met. Police and into the hands of local authorities who employ parking attendants to assist them in enforcing parking). see: http://www.parkingandtrafficappeals....ts/Davis41.pdf The signature could actually be the Warden's normal signature and wouldn't prove anything if you challenge it-they all carry hand held computerised devices and note pads that record all the information anyway. Unless any one else can point out something I can't see, I feel your chances aren't good. I agree these fines are a total rip off and totally unfair -us motorists are penalised constantly. Good luck.

[colston]

Hi guys

Fascinating thread and the lack of morality among these private parking charlatans knows no bounds.
Can I throw another incident into the mix for comments/advice.
My wife (eight months pregnant, but that's another story) parked at a Euro Car Park this week and was short of change for a one hour ticket as the machine did not take coppers (she was about 1o pence short of silver). Searched around for attendant, surprise surprise none to be found, so she nipped to post office to get change. Long queue, 15 minute wait and, yes - you guessed it - #70 fine waiting on her return (attendant had again scarpered).
Now, my missus is a company car driver and her company lease her vehicle from a lease hire firm. I accept (but think it's outrageous) that DVLA will pass on details to Euro Car Parks of the registered owner (in this case, the lease company).
Question is, under data protection law, are they allowed to give our address to ECP so communication from them can been passed onto my missus? I've asked her to give lease hire company a call on the QT on Monday and tip them the wink that her private details should remain just that, private.
The penalty is totally out of proportion to the alleged 'crime'. At least Dick Turpin wore a mask/had a horse to feed (delete where applicable).

[climb28]

I have just received a very similar request from a company going by the name of Parking Eye. It states that I must pay them £70 or £40, should I pay it before July 10. Has anyone any experience of this lot? Are they just another private parking company? If so can I rightfully refuse to pay it based on the informtion provided by petej2811?
Thanks.

[Rob S]

Parking Eye have featured here before. They are just another private parking company trying it on. Just follow the advice in Pete's first post in this thread.