Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
As the registerd keeper I received the following parking charge Notice from MET parking services
After looking at the various forums I quickly realised this is a [problem] and wrote back to MET the following.
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing in regards to a parking charge Notice with the above reference number, which was sent to me as the registered keeper of the vehicle involved in an alleged breach of contract over parking regulations.
This is a matter which you will need to take up with the driver at the time of the alleged incident
MET Have now written back to me with the following letter, and I am wondering how i should proceed.
ONe small question though benn133, if it was a McDonalds drive thru, it must have been a heck of a queue for it to take 2 hours 51 minutes to get to the front of the queue and get served!!
i am not sure why you think this is a [problem], i use this Maccas quite a bit, and it is clearly sign posted that you can only stay for 60 minutes ( this is to stop mini cabs and taxis hanging around till they get a booking, the same thing applies at the Maccas at gatwick airport) and they have CCTV showing that you were there for 171 minutes, am i missing something here?
i am not sure why you think this is a [problem], am i missing something here?
It would appear you are BaldyBaldwin.
benn133 used their carpark and resturant for the purpose it was intended, or may not even have been there at all if someone else was using the car that day.
Just because the driver chose to take longer than the "alloted time" to enjoy his visit does not mean they are entitled to rip him off for car parking charges dressed up to look like official council PCNs. i.e. A [problem]
"I'd like to assure you that I do not give any drivers of my car authority to enter into contracts on my behalf, and therefore refer you to my previous letter. Further, as a month passed between the photos being taken and receipt of your letter, I cannot recall who the driver was."
i am not sure why you think this is a [problem], i use this Maccas quite a bit, and it is clearly sign posted that you can only stay for 60 minutes ( this is to stop mini cabs and taxis hanging around till they get a booking, the same thing applies at the Maccas at gatwick airport) and they have CCTV showing that you were there for 171 minutes, am i missing something here?
The driver of this vehicle often uses this McDs and what they may have done is entered the drive thru got a coffee left and returned a couple of hours for lunch, and left, however they cannot prove or confirm this, just as MET cannot prove who the driver was.
i have been trying to get some CCTV footage of and accident i was involved in, and it seems that all cctv footage is kept for at least 31 days, as you know the date and approx. time that you think you left, could you not ask to see the film?
CREM. . . .
if you had a resturant and people were using it for free parking and stopping customers from using it would you not do some thimg about it?
thats why the cameras are there
I wouldn’t have even bother entertaining this PPC's invoice - their correspondence so far show too many errors and inconsistencies to be relied on if it where to go to court (but the chances of that are absolute zero! - ask 'angry_driver' - lol - it's not commercially viable for them to pursue).
Just simply ignore and don't worry about the many more letters they will continue to send in the hope that you may pay up! - they will eventually simply move onto others who may pay.
CREM. . . .
if you had a resturant and people were using it for free parking and stopping customers from using it would you not do some thimg about it?
thats why the cameras are there
It's a [problem] - simple as that:
If genuinely retailers wished to kerb abuse of their car parks then why do they not have a simple system whereby one gives your registration number into the retailer when you purchase (or browsing) and your registration number can then be except from 'the system' and this would avoid genuine shoppers wrongly being targeted?
Oh...hang on a minute! - that would mean that, if this logical system worked, then the revenue stream from the current system of 'blanket invoicing' customers would simply dry up! - thus the reason this system exists as it is today and is not logical in it's execution - it is nothing more than a [problem] to extract as much money from 'Joe public' as they can - simple as that.
the problem with your logocal system is that browsing customers were sitting in the car park for hours on end, that is why they state that there is no return for 90 minutes is because after 58 minutes people were simply driving out the car park going round the roundabout coming back in and sitting there for another hour.
free parking on canary wharf is at an absolute premium and it was being abused by mini cab drivers,taxi drivers and delivery vans, most of them not even using Maccas, that is why the system was introduced.
there are 3 maccas near me and they are used properly and there are no money making [problem]s there
why they state that there is no return for 90 minutes is because after 58 minutes people were simply driving out the car park going round the roundabout coming back in and sitting there for another hour.
So it's ok to dish out 'fines', demand large amounts of cash and intimidate their victims with lies and threats?
there are to seperate issues here. .
this car park used to be free but then it was abused and could not be used for the purpose it was intended for, ie for customers using the resturant, you are given an hour to eat your meal,is that not reasonable it is fast food after all, and the signs pointing out the terms and conditions are plentiful and diplayed in prominant places,that is the point i am trying to make.
if you do not abide by the T&C,s and over stay by 2 hours does that make you a victim?
Victim ? Only if the PPC tries to [problem] you and you fall for it. the first hurdle is in the PPC's hands but the second one isn't - don't fall for it and there is no victim.
Yes, as the actual loss to the parking company, OR macdonalds, is way way less(in fact, negligable) compared to the fine issued. This is an unfair penalty, and cannot be enforced in law.
In addition, there has to be a contract indicating an AGREEANCE to the T&Cs in question. For this to occur, the PPC has to prove that the RK is the driver at the time of the "offence" and, more importantly, prove that the driver had knowledge of the relevant T&Cs. The second is difficult to prove in particular - how do you show your sign is prominent enough to ensure that it COULD NOT be missed and COULD NOT have not been read?
However - yes it is a [problem], as it is profiteering via unlawful means.
7 years in retail customer service
Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years
By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.
Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.
In addition, there has to be a contract indicating an AGREEANCE to the T&Cs in question.
Question: If one overstays the stated time allowed, could this action be deemed that one does not agree to the T&C's and therefore has not entred into a contract? - in otherwords, by simply ignoring any signage, can this not demonstrate that you do not agree to a contract in the first place!
Parking Ticket while at McDonalds Drive Thru
Notice from MET parking services
Reply With Quote
LF53
Originally Posted by BaldyBaldwin
