Evening all,

I note the last post to this thread was some time ago, so I hope that someone can help still with this.

As it is now 2014 also I wanted to check the advice was still the same too.

I stopped at Mcdonalds/starbucks to get some refreshments whilst I waited for my girlfriend to arrive back at the airport but due to the flight running late I went over the allowed time limit of 60 minutes and ended up staying 105 min! Good ole Ryanair...

I have received a parking charge notice in the post with photographs of my car arriving

and leaving and been asked to pay £100 or £60 if paid within 14 days.

Can you advise the best way forward?

I am normally a bit of a goody goody and do not want hassle and would just pay this,

however I feel particularly annoyed about this and i used Starbucks

and only overstayed due to a flight being delayed which of course is out of my control.

Cheers,

Own thread created

what letters have you had so far

had the notice to keeper and the popla stuff yet?

dx

Just the initial parking charge notice so far which is the notice to the keeper.

Did you get the Notice To Keeper within fourteen days of the parking date?

If so, then send an appeal to MET stating that as registered keeper of vehicle reg. xxxxxx ,you are not liable for this charge.

No loss has occurred to the landowner, by the driver of my vehicle spending money in Mcdonalds.

Also, this is not relevant land for schedule 4 of the P.O.F.A 2012 to be invoked. ( Don't know that for sure, but the response will be interesting.)

Please cancel this charge forthwith, or alternatively issue me with a valid code for the independent appeals service POPLA.

This appeal has been sent with proof of postage.

The Prankster has just blogged about MET...

MET Parking deceive motorists for years.

Thanks for the responses so far .

Reading the historical posts the tactic seemed to be just to ignore everything that was sent through and the charge would go away.

Does this tactic not work anymore and hence to send a letter back to them?

I did receive the notice within 14 days yes.

No, dont ignore, fight back and cost them money whilst you are at it.

There are procedures both parties need to go through to.

Agree that land inside most airports is covered by byelaws so not "relevant land" as far as PoFA goes so MET have no rights to claim. That means that any agreement with MaccyD's is overridden by landlord's rights and obligations.

They will need to prove their case and they wont want to so appeal to MET and state that you do not think that it is "relevant land" under PoFA and demand that they provide "strict proof" that it is and contract with McD's isnt proof of that.

If they reject your appeal then they should give you a POPLA code and you can take it to appeal which will cost them money and you will defeat them on several grounds but always mention that charge does not represent their loss or genuine pre-estimate of loss.

Just to let anyone reading this know that I appealed and I have heard nothing back from them. A good month has passed now.

Just to let anyone reading this know that I appealed and I have heard nothing back from them. A good month has passed now.

Thank you for the update Sultan.

My crystal ball tells me this is not over

Just to let anyone reading this know that I appealed and I have heard nothing back from them. A good month has passed now.

They should have acknowledged the appeal within fourteen days, and accepted or declined the appeal by thirty five days...

Did you get proof of postage?

well, if 35 days have passed they are in breach of the rules of the trade association they signed up to so are basically stuffed. You can now:

1) ignore then until they provide a valid POPLA code, which they cannot do.

2) write and complain to the BPA that MET arent following the rules and what are they going to do about it.

3) poke them with a stick just to see what they intend to do.

I favour 1 because they cannot take you to court and win because the judge will demand to know wht they arent obeying the ACOP they signed up to, thus making their claim an abuse of process. If you prefer to know that there will be a definite end date then do 2) as the BPA will prod them and you will get special dispensation to appeal to POPLA, where you will win, with the help of this forum.

If you choose option 3 they will think that you are daft enough to pay up as you keep bothering them and so will try all sorts of things to get the money.

Well, it's all rather odd.

I used to tracking number on the Royal Mail website and it said the item was never delivered... so it was either lost or they never signed for it at MET parking services. I spoke to Royal Mail customer services and they said I needed to fill in a form and they will try and find the letter I sent...

I did however ring MET Parking services to see if they had received the letter or not and they had! They said they responded saying my appeal was unsuccessful and the letter was dated 6th August.... I never got this letter back, they are going to send a copy.

So now i will wait for this letter to come through. I stated in my appeal letter about not being 'relevant land' and requiring strict proof that it is...

I should get a copy of the letter from them in the next day or two - what's the next step now this has been rejected then? I guess it depends on their reasoning of why the appeal has been unsuccessful in the letter.

1. Free proof of postage is all you need when writing to a PPC.

2. Never ring or talk to a PPC on the phone. Always in writing. Most are not to be trusted, so leave a paper trail...

When you receive this 'copy', then I suspect that the POPLA code will be out of time.

Update thread and we'll go from there...

Complain to the BPA about their failure to send out their rejection letter in the prescribed time and demand to know what the bPA are going to do about this.

You can also write to MET and demand a copy of their proof of posting of the supposed rejection and the POPLA code. Use the parking prankster's reckoner to work out when the POPLA code was generated, they may not be telling you the truth (I know it is hard to imagine and there must be a good explanation for it).

Afternoon,

Right I have the rejection letter, I have typed up the document so i do not have attach a copy - would it be easier if i showed you the wording and we can take it from there?

Thanks

Afternoon,

 

Right I have the rejection letter, I have typed up the document so i do not have attach a copy - would it be easier if i showed you the wording and we can take it from there?

 

Thanks

Show us the letter, redacted of personal info and POPLA code.

Check when the code was generated here;

http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla-code-checker/

This is the wording of the letter received:

Having carefully considered the evidence provided by you we have decided to reject your appeal for the following reasons:

The terms and conditions of use of the car park are clearly stated on the signs prominently displayed at this site including that there is a 60 minute maximum stay for the use of South Gate Park customers only.

South Gate Park at confident that there are a sufficient number of signs in place at this location warning drivers of the time limit in place.

It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that they check the signage in place where they are parking their vehicle and comply with any parking restrictions.

South Gate Park car parks are on private land and the signage is in place is within the guidelines of the British parking association in which we are a member of. Attached is a copy of our signage which states that the motorists visiting this car park are entering into a contractual agreement. We have also attached a site map showing the location of the signs at this site. The signs state do not park in this car park unless you agree to the terms and conditions of use in full.

MET Parking services ltd are the creditor engaged by South Gate Park to enforce adherence to the terms and conditions of use of this car park and have the authority to issue parking charge notices for contractual breach. Under the law of agency the contract you have entered into is with ourselves.

We note you have requested a copy of this contract between ourselves and our client, however, we do not believe that it is necessary to provide this at this stage. Should the matter proceed to court we will provide all necessary paperwork , redacted as appropriate, to support our claim as creditor.

We would like to point out that the charge notice was issued for breach of contract and the sum that is payable is in event of breach of the terms and conditions of use of the parking contract are clearly identified at the site.

Our charge notice represents a claim for liquidated damages and the sum we are seeking to recover has been calculated as a genuine pre-estimate loss and reflects the anticipated recovery of the direct costs of enforcing adherence to the terms and conditions of parking at this site. This calculation is made with due regard to the guidelines set down by the office of fair trading.

In summary we can confirm, therefore, that the charge was issued correctly and we are upholding it. To avoid any future parking charge notices, please ensure you always comply with the terms and conditions of parking and any restrictions that are in place when you park your car.

This decision which has been based on the facts of the case and takes into account our consideration of any mitigating circumstances, is our final decision.

It goes on to give me the option to pay, appeal to POPLA or if neither debt recovery/legal/court action.

Have you checked the date of the POPLA code?

So MET are employed by South Gate but are claiming the right to demand monies in their own name. This means that the contract between SGP and MET is critical as they say they are relying on the law of agency and this only applies to transactions and means that the provision of services is not included in the law they quote.

So as an agent are they entitled to claim in their own name? No However, they will undoubtedly argue that they are not a commwercial agent but another sort. Again, the contract will decide if they even have a right to put their claim forward and if they do have that right it does not mean they have sufferd a loss as they are only agents!.

Appeal to POPLA using the 10 digit reference code on the basis of

1) a lack of contract that allows them to claim monies in their own name as they say they are agents of SGP and as such they cannot claim for a loss caused by your action as it is for the principal to make the claim. Therfore you demand sight of the contract where all rights to make claims are assigned from the landlord to MET

2) in any case, the amount claimed does not represent their losses for the overstay in a free car park and is thus an unlawful penalty rather than a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

If you think the signage was inadequate-none at the entrance to the car park, wrong size etc then use that as point 2 and label the others 1&3.

Hi,

Thanks for the guidance. Regarding have I checked the POPLA and it appears my time to appeal has expired. Note I did not receive the original letter and had to request a copy (hence my post about not having a response).

This is what has come up when I checked my POPLA code - I should include this in my appeal letter. As the time limit has expired, do I require to request a new POPLA code, or appeal with below explanation and also say that I never received the original and had to request a copy?

Code summary

Issuing operator: MET Parking Services Ltd (Code: 386)

Date code generated: Wed Aug 06 2014

Code sequence number: 494

Deadline information

You have missed the deadline to appeal!

Your deadline was on the Wed Sep 03 2014

Your deadline passed 5 day(s) ago

Grounds for complaint

This code was generated 1 day(s) before the date of your appeal rejection letter. This means that you have not been given the full 28 days to appeal that you are entitled to under the British Parking Association's Code of Practice. Please consider making a complaint.

Make a complaint to the BPA. copying it to MET and POPLA (by post). Your coplaint should be that MET are deliberately failing to send out the letters of rejection in time for an appeal to POPLA to be made. Also include your written appeal to POPLA with their copy of your complaint letter. It will save having to send it later as you will undoubtedly be given a new code as they dont want to investigate the matter properly.

If the POPLA code wasnt on the letter you have posted up and you have only just received this then make a complaint about MET not issuing the POPLA code as required to do. Demand to know from the BPA how many similar complaints they have received regarding attempts to avoid issuing POPLA codes.

Morning,

I have written up the letter that is going to the BPA and cc Met Parking and POPLA - I am about to write my appeal letter to POPLA, however as my code has expired (before I got a copy of the appeal rejection letter), will POPLA even consider my appeal?

Thanks,

as per my previous post they will undoubtedly accept your appeal otherwise the parking co has lost the right to claim from you entirely and they wont want to give up their income stream that easily.

You send the appeal to POPLA with a copy of the complaint you are sending to the BPA and copy that to MET and make it clear that you expect them to consider it or you will be chasing MET for the costs of a second submission..

Ok.

I have drafted an appeal to POPLA. Shall i mention to them, as I did in the appeal letter to MET about parking around airports not being 'relevant land'?

Thanks