Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
    • Nationwide Building Society has launched an 18 month fixed-rate account paying 5.5%.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

MET Parking Services


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4022 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I have just seen one of their PCNs as they call them, or Parking Charge Notice as it says at the top of the "Important Legal Notice"-funny, I have never heard of an invoice called that before.

 

This was sent out as a result of a car overstaying the "Free Stay Period" of

one hour by 20 minutes. The fine is £100, or £50 if paid within 14 days. Does

seem exorbitant for a 20 minute overstay-especially as the driver bought a meal when he was there. I use meal in its widest possible context as it was

in a McDonalds drive thru carpark.

 

I know that one cannot use the wording "Fixed Penalty Notice" as a private

contractor, but is PCN similarly earmarked for the use of Councils only?

 

The DVLA apparently have a Code of Practice when supplying drivers details

to commercial companies -here are some of them-

 

 

Vehicle keepers must be contacted by letter and should not be approached in their homes in respect of the enforcement of claims (other than for the service of notices and court papers) until a Court judgement has been secured.

 

Terms of Supply

4.1. Information will be disclosed on condition that it relates to, and will be used only in connection with, an enquiry relating to the identification of a vehicle keeper for a parking contravention/trespass on private property.

 

NO OTHER USE IS PERMITTED.

 

4.2. The principles of the Data Protection Act 1998 must always be adhered to when such information is disclosed.

 

4.3. Nothing in this Code shall be construed as being in any way binding by way of a contract or otherwise, to supply all or any data to the enquirer. Nonetheless, DVLA will not normally withhold data unless the enquirer fails to comply with the terms of the Data Protection Act.

 

4.4. The information provided is the property of DVLA and must not be duplicated or held for longer than is necessary.

 

Use of Data

6.1. The enquirer must not disclose any Data to a third party other than in respect of the institution of legal proceedings. However, if the enquirer intends to use a third party to process data on their behalf, these Terms will apply to the third party and the Data may only be used for the aforementioned purpose. The enquirer will be held liable for any breach of these Terms by the third party. DVLA will not be held responsible for any problem arising between the enquirer and any such third party.

 

Not so sure that DVLA can opt out of its responsibilities on its own say so.

 

 

For anyone interested at this url-http://www.landor.co.uk/parkingreview/images/bill2.pdf

 

if you look at the section in pink headed "Things to avoid......."

no 4 the registered keeper /owner of the vehicle is not legally liable

Link to post
Share on other sites

PCN as issued by council's are PENALTY CHARGE NOTICES (PCN).

 

The PPC is having a bit of a 'twist' to PCN, prob. in an effort to make it seem like a council charge.

 

The British Parking Association guide to wheel clamping, and private ticketing is available on their website to download as a pdf. It makes interesting reading, with such rules as ' staff employed issuing tickets must have an ID card, and uniform'. So much for euro car parks !. Uniform yes, badge - no.

All opinions & information are the personal view of the poster, and are not that of any organisation, company or employer. Any information disclosed by the poster is for personal use only. Permission to process this data under the Data Protection act is NOT GIVEN to any company, only personal readers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 11 months later...

Ok here is the deal with MET Parking. They cannot take you to court for the huge amount they threaten to. They can only take you to court for the amount the parking ticket cost you which isn't worth their while.

 

They will send you endless letters asking for payment, then after 3 or 4 months the letters will have FINAL WARNING or something like that written on it. You will then receive a phone call from their so called solicitors asking you to confirm your post code as they are going to take you to court & need to send you the papers (since when do solictors do this?!!!). The papers will then arrive with another FINAL WARNING on it.

 

I went through all this over about a 6 month period & they eventually go away as they know full well they cannot take you to court. The letters & phone calls are just to scare you into paying. Take it from me ignore them completely, keep all the papers & get on with your life as they will crawl back under the rock they came from eventually.

  • I agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I forgot to add that I'm pretty sure that the MET Police took them to court as they use a very similar name & logo - check it out - very similar. Why do you think they chose the MET Police name & logo to copy? - as it will scare people into paying without argument & they will think it is above board if they are linked to the police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look for the Perky thread on here & you'll find that this type of extortion has been dealt a savage blow. In the case of Excel Parking (which is large company) the court decided they had no licence from the land owners which would have permitted them to charge for parking which is precisley what they are doing & that a tenant such as McDonalds cannot grant one:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My mum got a PCN from MET parking a few weeks ago and we paid it within the 14days.

She has now rec'd a 2nd one for a week later parking in the same car park. She totally forgot about paying it and now it is upto £100.

Reading all these posts is making me think about now paying it. Should we ignoreit or pay up. Advice if poss pls. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My mum got a PCN from MET parking a few weeks ago and we paid it within the 14days.

She has now rec'd a 2nd one for a week later parking in the same car park. She totally forgot about paying it and now it is upto £100.

Reading all these posts is making me think about now paying it. Should we ignoreit or pay up. Advice if poss pls. Thanks.

IGNORE, IGNORE, and then IGNORE.

If you want to give money away is there not a charity more worthwhile of your generosity?

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I was issued a ticket by MET despite having a valid pay and display ticket. I wrote with a copy of it, but my protests were ignored and the ticket doubled along with threats of court action and bailiffs. As MET are the adjudicators, it's like having the prosecution counsel as the judge! They sent a wide angle photo of my car which proves nothing. I am reassured by reading these posts that they will not take court action, although I cannot see how they could possibly win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My mum got a PCN from MET parking a few weeks ago and we paid it within the 14days.

She has now rec'd a 2nd one for a week later parking in the same car park. She totally forgot about paying it and now it is upto £100.

Reading all these posts is making me think about now paying it. Should we ignoreit or pay up. Advice if poss pls. Thanks.

 

Your mum's been scammed once - don't let her do it again.

 

• do not pay

• do not contact them

ignore their threatening junkmail

• they will not take you to court

• no bailiffs will turn up

• they will give up and go away

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got a ticket in my local gym for parking outside of a bay from Met Services (someone four cars down parked outside the bay and the knock on effect meant several cars,myself included, all did the same). Despite having a strong case I am pretty sure I'm going down the ignore, ignore, ignore route. The only problem is I use the car park three times a week, do they have any authority to clamp my car for non payment/ignoring their letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I entered into correspondence with MET and tried to appeal my parking ticket because I had a valid ticket. But they disallowed it and threatened me with bailiffs, etc. It's like having the prosecution counsel acting as Judge!

 

At least with a local authority PCN, one has recourse to independent adjudicators. Apparently MET won't take you to court because their paperwork is illegal. Ie erroneously claiming it's a PCN, as from local authorities or the police. They rely on scare tactics to coerce people into paying up, but apparently never take action. But I'm still worried that my car may get impounded as they have access to the DVLA records and know my address.

 

I asked for photographic proof, and was sent a wide angle shot with a time code, but one can't make out the ticket.

 

The real scandal is that that the DVLA sells personal information to these sharks who don't abide by the law and are not subject to independent adjudication. I read about a case where a private contractor and rapist (who was convicted) used his access to the DVLA database to find the address of his victim! Shocking!

 

Alternatively, if you want to attempt to reason with them and get them to cancel the fine, on this forum there are templates of letters challenging their legality, that may be effective. I've yet to find out

 

I don't know what to do either, having commenced correspondence and admitted to being the driver. I have successfully appealed PCNs from the LA when I had a valid permit that slipped from the dashboard. At least they listen to reason.

 

Maybe I'll be a martyr, if I can be bothered!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Natwestlondon,

You have found out how pointless to even waste the time and a stamp to appeal these [problem] invoices.

The best action now is to ignore all their letters.

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Re: MET Parking Services

I have been sent a Parking Charge Notice from these guys. I had arranged to meet a friend at the Gatwick Airport's McDonalds, she called to say it was too far to walk. I picked her up and went back to buy food. We ate in the car and was there for no longer that 15 mins. A week later I got a Parking charge notice, with 2 pics of me in the car alone and one with both of us in the car. There is a clear sign saying I could not return, I did not see the sign that night though. I wish I'd read all this first as I actually wrote to them to say yes it was me and explained what has happened. They have just written back to say I still have to pay saying due to photographic evidence etc I still need to pay. Please reassure me that it will not end up in court. Has anyone been taken to court? I am worried sick and do not have 50.00 to pay them any way!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore it.

 

Pity you didn't notice the sign on the first visit though coz then you could have taken your custom somewhere other than McDonalds.

 

Don't forget to tell McDonalds you don't intend either paying the parking charge or spend any more money in their chain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I will. I will ignore it. I will write to their head office. I have tried to call them but can't get through. I think it will be better to write to them. Of course my hubby is worried and doesn't want us to end up with a judgement against us. Can this happen?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I will. I will ignore it. I will write to their head office. I have tried to call them but can't get through. I think it will be better to write to them. Of course my hubby is worried and doesn't want us to end up with a judgement against us. Can this happen?

Yes, under the following circumstances:

 

1) They take you to court (same odds as winning the Euro lottery)

2) They win the case against you (same odds as winning the Euro Lottery 4 weeks on the run)

3) You refuse to pay the judgement against you within 28 days

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I visited McDonalds today, at 60 Sewardstone Rd, in Chingford, where they employ MET Parking Services to patrol the car park. Today I watched, along with others, while the attendant took advantage of the fact that the car park was full to capacity (probably less than 30 cars?) and taking photos and issuing tickets to customers who had to resort to parking in the disabled bays so that they could buy from the restaurant. Those disabled bays don't really serve their purpose as they're not exactly where I would call the best position for disabled users anyway, but I digress.

 

Not surprisingly, this provoked a response from customers, who complained to the restaurant staff, a passing police van (who had also just bought their lunch from the restaurant), and the parking attendant, all of who seemed quite bemused by it, probably because they are all aware that the parking charge notices they then send out aren't really legally binding and lawful, and therefore not a matter for the police unless it turns violent or the victim decides to consider the matter a criminal offence, such as extorting money by harassment and fraudulent means, for example.

 

Because of this, I've complained to Mcdonalds and MET Parking services, who I suspect probably won't really care. I thought it might be in the local public's interest to know about this con, so I've also let my local paper know.

 

I bet if you were to visit the car park now, that the same con artist will still be taking advantage of potential customers, and probably does so every lunchtime when it's potentially likely to get busy.

 

I'm sure he's probably lost McDonalds a few customers today by his actions, so you would think they might take it a little seriously, but I'll wait and see. :)

 

Half tempted to go back down there, and for every person he issues a ticket to, tell them about this forum and tell them not to bother getting angry and shouting at the lowlife. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Half tempted to go back down there, and for every person he issues a ticket to, tell them about this forum and tell them not to bother getting angry and shouting at the lowlife. :)

Thats the way to hurt them most.

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your help and advice. I managed to ring McDonalds head office, who were very sorry but said there was nothing they could do. I told her in very polite terms that they should be ashamed of themselves. :mad: She reasured me that the MET Parking Services were a reputable company and that they would not use them if they were not. She also said they they are legally entitled to enforce the payment of this fine. :eek: I reminded her that it wasn't a fine, but an invoice! I have also written to them to tell them I will not eat McDonalds again!

It is amazing that they get away with this. I will not pay it and will keep you all posted with the letters I get as I will need reassurance that I am doing the right thing!:???:

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...