Met Parking Services - Private PCN - McDs billingsgate

[annoyed09]

I've received a Parking Charge notice from Met Parking Services for overstaying at the Billingsgate McDonalds Car Park.

They sent it to my cousin’s address as when I bought the car, I was living there and registered it there.

Having moved back home over xmas, I forgot to send DVLA the slip to update the address. My cousins are going to mind being bombarded with letters and threats of bailiffs coming round and I therefore have to respond to MET parking services and get them to stop writing to my cousin’s address.

I have been reading around the site about things that people are putting into their letters and have come up with the following

Letter to follow

Any feedback/comments are much appreciated.

Thanks to all those that have contributed to letters around the site, I hope its okay to have taken some out of each to make up this one.

[annoyed09]

To Whom It May Concern:

 

 

Re: ‘Parking Charge Notice’ dated 12th February 2009, Reference

 

 

I acknowledge receipt of your ‘Parking charge notice’. It seems that you have got my details from DVLA and I confirm I am the keeper of the vehicle in question.

 

You appear to claim that I, as keeper, am legally responsible for this alleged debt, as in your notice you state:

"As the registered owner / keeper / hirer of the vehicle you are required to pay the parking charge within 28 days of the parking charge notice issue date”

 

This is, in actual fact untrue. Since the 2008 Consumer Regulations Act, the BPA has made it clear to all AOS members that written communications should "make it clear that the liability is with the driver".

 

AOS members have also been told by the BPA that communications should only convey the message that:

“The name and address of the registered keeper of the vehicle will be requested from the DVLA and a request will be sent to the keeper asking for the name and address of the driver at the time the charge was incurred”

 

Unfortunately this was not conveyed in the alleged charge notice that you sent to me.

 

Moreover, although the registered keeper is responsible for any parking contravention charges issued by the police or local authority (under the Road Traffic Act of 1991), you will obviously be aware that this is not the case for parking contravention charges issued by private parking companies and that any contract that you believe to have had is with the driver of this vehicle on the day in question, not with the registered keeper. I do not keep records of who has driven this car on any given day, nor do I, as the registered keeper, have any legal obligation to supply you with this information.

 

Your website and information published on the BPA website states that you are members of the AOS, however in sending me the alleged charge, you are failing to adhere to the Code of Practice as well as the notes that the BPA has cascaded to all members.

 

 

 

This alleged 'Charge', which you have sent me, is in fact an invoice from a private company and is not a Penalty Charge Notice. Penalties in civil contracts, where such contracts actually exist, are unenforceable in English law. This is long established as Excel parking recently found out in Court when losing the case they mounted to enforce such a charge. Much Case Law has been quoted to me in this regard especially, but not limited to:-

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. (1915).

 

Attached are copies of letters that I am sending to the DVLA and BPA with regards to the alleged charge that you have sent me.

 

Please refrain from any further contact regarding this matter unless it is to issue county court summons. I have only recently moved address, you may direct the county court summons to my address, as above.

 

In the meantime, I absolutely deny your claim that the amount claimed, or any amount at all, is due to you from me.

 

 

Yours faithfully

Edited February 26, 2009 by annoyed09

[Al27]

I therefore have to respond to MET parking services and get them to stop writing to my cousin’s address.

 

Your letter, any letter, will have the opposite effect. They'll just think since you're rattled enough to write, you could cave in and pay. So you could get more letters.

 

There are only two options:

 

• completely ignore and receive 3/4 letters

• contact them and receive 4, 5, 6 letters

[lamma]

IF you really want to send the letter add the fact that in your view their failure to adhere to the BPA CoP puts them in Clear Breach of The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 No. to the extent that are liable for sanction under that Act due to, inter alia, "committing the offence of indulging in a misleading practice. and that I consider that MET Parking Services are probably in breach of Reg (9) which is a strict liability criminal offence.". Copy your letter to the PPC to local Trading Standards and your MP.

[annoyed09]

Your letter, any letter, will have the opposite effect. They'll just think since you're rattled enough to write, you could cave in and pay. So you could get more letters.

 

There are only two options:

 

• completely ignore and receive 3/4 letters

• contact them and receive 4, 5, 6 letters

 

well i dont mind if they write to my current home address. i'll just ignore those. but i dont want them sending these to my old address as my cousins will mind.

 

im also drafting letters to DVLA, BPA and local trading standards.

 

i have a question.. will i get into trouble for not changing the address of where the car is registered? the insurance is under my new address. i just forgot to update the logbook.

[lamma]

just update it with DVLA asap

[crem]

i have a question.. will i get into trouble for not changing the address of where the car is registered? the insurance is under my new address. i just forgot to update the logbook.

 

The DVLA only require you to provide an address at which they can write to you and that you will receive the letters. Providing you are confident your cousin would have given you the letters prompty then I don't believe any offence has been committed. I am sure there are many people (such as students) who maintain their parents address on many such documents and it would still serve as a valid address at which they could be written to,.

[the_freedom_trail]

I am a student and my vehicle is registered at my parents address - it is a much more reliable address to send important post to than my current address.

 

TFT

[annoyed09]

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter is not requesting personal information and so is not a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection legislation therefore I believe no fees are involved.

As your records will show I am the Registered Keeper of vehicle index ___. On __2009, my vehicle garnered a purported Penalty Charge Notice from Met Parking Services, a copy of which is enclosed.

Please note this document does not contain the actual address of Met Parking Servics, which I am advised is in breach of "The Companies (Registrar, Languages and Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006 No.3429)".

I add for your information that I have also been referred to multiple Statutes which may be being broken by Met Parking Services, including but not limited to:-

• The Enterprise Act 2002 (Supply of Services) Order 2003

• Misrepresentation Act 1967

• Fraud Act 2006

• The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (particularly Regulation 7).

It is due to the latter Statutory Instrument, and having their attention drawn to it by Trading Standards, that the BPA have already made a rapid change to their Code of Practice, as I am sure you are aware. The BPA issued a note containing the following:-

"2. Keeper/driver liability

2.1 Changes to Code of Practice - Part 2 Parking Tickets

The paragraph 36) C) – xviii (Parking Ticket Issue - page 10) will be amended to read:

“What will happen next if no payment or challenge is received within the time(s) allowed and any further charges that may be accrued, e.g. “the name and address of the registered keeper of the vehicle will be requested from the DVLA and a request will be sent to the keeper asking for the name and address of the driver at the time the charge was incurred””.

2.2 The paragraph 67) A) (Enforcement Action on outstanding parking tickets – Notice to Owner - page 13); this “letter to the owner” should make no reference to asking for payment but should specifically point out the details of the contravention and request that the owner furnish the details of the driver at the time the charge was incurred.

3. Implementation

3.1 Because of the importance and possible implications of this information, these amendments are to be implemented immediately. Members involved in ticketing operations should contact BPA to confirm receipt and acknowledgement of this notice, and should contact BPA again to confirm an implementation timescale within a week of sending the first e-mail."

Please also take note of the fact that the 'Reminder' clearly states that Met Parking Services is attempting to shift the liability of an alleged contract to a third party - namely me. This is not a genuine PCN as issued by councils so any alleged contract is clearly with the driver whom Met Parking Services have never addressed nor as far as I can tell even tried to identify prior to demanding money from the Registered Keeper. This is clearly not lawful. It is also against the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) which the DVLA insists is adhered to and enforced. As I understand it the BPA has made all members of the “Approved Operator Scheme” (AOS) personally sign off that they have adopted appropriate wording viz:-

"I hereby confirm that I have read and understood the BPA Code of Practice for Parking Enforcement on Private Land and unregulated Public Car Parks. Part 1 Vehicle Immobilisation or Removal and/or Part 2 Parking Tickets and will ensure that, as a member of the British Parking Association, the company:

1. Complies with these Codes of Practice....... "

The BPA has made it clear to all AOS members that written communications should "make it clear that the liability is with the driver"

AOS members have also been told by the BPA that communications should only convey the message that:

“the name and address of the registered keeper of the vehicle will be requested from the DVLA and a request will be sent to the keeper asking for the name and address of the driver at the time the charge was incurred”

Met Parking Services is a member of the AOS, as per the published list on the BPA website but is most clearly not adhering to the Code of Practice nor to the Notes that the BPA has sent them.

I am sending a letter of complaint to the BPA Compliance Officer about this and will keep you informed of the response as I fully expect the BPA to be held to the conditions imposed by the DVLA, by the DVLA itself and to actually do something about this.

If they fail to take positive steps then I will of course be in touch with you. As you know the BPA is a private company and so is exempt from Freedom of Information requests and may choose not to send me such supporting as a copy of the personal sign-of to the CoP by Met Parking Services. In which case I will ask you to:-

“• investigate at DVLA’s request any complaints about alleged breach of the COP or inappropriate use of information and report on the outcome.”

This 'Charge' is in fact an invoice from a private company and is not

a Penalty Charge Notice. Penalties in civil contracts, where such contracts actually exist, are unenforceable in English law. This is long established as Excel parking recently found out in Court when losing the case they mounted to enforce such a charge.

Much Case Law has been quoted to me in this regard especially, but not limited to:-

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. (1915).

The weight of law in this area, both statute and well established case law, clearly shows that Met Parking Services are not using the information they obtain in a "fair and responsible manner". Hence their 'cause' is 'unreasonable'.

Assuming that the DVLA have assessed Met Parking Services on their behaviour on the use of the data that you have supplied, I formally request a copy of that assessment.

From the information on the DVLA web site it is apparent that Met Parking Services should have used form V888/2 to request my details from you and that they also have to supply adequate information to The DVLA in order to qualify to use this service. They also have to meet well stated conditions in their business operations and in their use of the data that you supply.

I formally request a copy of their request plus all supporting documentation that Met Parking Services sent to you to obtain my personal information in order to issue the attached communications. This includes the documentation required to satisfy:-

"Companies acting on behalf of landowners must provide evidence (contract/agreement) from the landowner to confirm that they are acting with the consent of the landowner. Enforcement companies don't have to provide contracts but should supply a letter from the landlord (on headed paper) confirming that they're acting with the approval of the landlord in enforcing parking restrictions.

Letters should also include the start and end date of the contract, the locations of sites and if CCTV or manual ticketing is in operation."

It is also a condition that:-

"Material evidence should be provided that a penalty charge scheme is in operation and that signs are clearly visible to drivers. You must confirm if CCTV cameras are in operation or if notices are left on vehicle windscreens. Full details of your operations must be included with your application."

I request a copy of that material evidence.

I fully realise that the DVLA has no authority to regulate any Parking Companies nor to arbitrate in any dispute, I am not asking you to do either of those things. I am asking for Information and pointing out to you the true nature of the business of this client of yours and how they conduct their business and how non-straightforward it is.

Based on this evidence plus the supplied outline of just SOME of the laws being broken and the signed-off BPA CoP which the DVLA insists is enforceable I do have the expectation that you will deal with this appropriately according to your own published polices and procedures.

I believe it has been more than amply demonstrated that the use Met Parking Services made of the information you supplied is neither lawful nor 'reasonable' and that they are unequivocally in breach of the BPA’s CoP.

Yours faithfully.

[My Real Name]

I would save yourself the cost of the stamp. Your letter will most likely be ignored, and taken as a cue to send you more letters.

[annoyed09]

as per my first post, i'd rather they write to my home address as i'll ignore those. if they write to my cousins house, i have to reply cos they wont be happy.

[letshelp]

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

This letter is not requesting personal information and so is not a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection legislation therefore I believe no fees are involved.

 

As your records will show I am the Registered Keeper of vehicle index ___. On __2009, my vehicle garnered a purported Penalty Charge Notice from Met Parking Services, a copy of which is enclosed.

 

Please note this document does not contain the actual address of Met Parking Servics, which I am advised is in breach of "The Companies (Registrar, Languages and Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006 No.3429)".

 

I add for your information that I have also been referred to multiple Statutes which may be being broken by Met Parking Services, including but not limited to:-

• The Enterprise Act 2002 (Supply of Services) Order 2003

• Misrepresentation Act 1967

• Fraud Act 2006

• The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (particularly Regulation 7).

 

It is due to the latter Statutory Instrument, and having their attention drawn to it by Trading Standards, that the BPA have already made a rapid change to their Code of Practice, as I am sure you are aware. The BPA issued a note containing the following:-

"2. Keeper/driver liability

2.1 Changes to Code of Practice - Part 2 Parking Tickets

The paragraph 36) C) – xviii (Parking Ticket Issue - page 10) will be amended to read:

“What will happen next if no payment or challenge is received within the time(s) allowed and any further charges that may be accrued, e.g. “the name and address of the registered keeper of the vehicle will be requested from the DVLA and a request will be sent to the keeper asking for the name and address of the driver at the time the charge was incurred””.

2.2 The paragraph 67) A) (Enforcement Action on outstanding parking tickets – Notice to Owner - page 13); this “letter to the owner” should make no reference to asking for payment but should specifically point out the details of the contravention and request that the owner furnish the details of the driver at the time the charge was incurred.

3. Implementation

3.1 Because of the importance and possible implications of this information, these amendments are to be implemented immediately. Members involved in ticketing operations should contact BPA to confirm receipt and acknowledgement of this notice, and should contact BPA again to confirm an implementation timescale within a week of sending the first e-mail."

Please also take note of the fact that the 'Reminder' clearly states that Met Parking Services is attempting to shift the liability of an alleged contract to a third party - namely me. This is not a genuine PCN as issued by councils so any alleged contract is clearly with the driver whom Met Parking Services have never addressed nor as far as I can tell even tried to identify prior to demanding money from the Registered Keeper. This is clearly not lawful. It is also against the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) which the DVLA insists is adhered to and enforced. As I understand it the BPA has made all members of the “Approved Operator Scheme” (AOS) personally sign off that they have adopted appropriate wording viz:-

 

"I hereby confirm that I have read and understood the BPA Code of Practice for Parking Enforcement on Private Land and unregulated Public Car Parks. Part 1 Vehicle Immobilisation or Removal and/or Part 2 Parking Tickets and will ensure that, as a member of the British Parking Association, the company:

1. Complies with these Codes of Practice....... "

 

The BPA has made it clear to all AOS members that written communications should "make it clear that the liability is with the driver"

 

AOS members have also been told by the BPA that communications should only convey the message that:

“the name and address of the registered keeper of the vehicle will be requested from the DVLA and a request will be sent to the keeper asking for the name and address of the driver at the time the charge was incurred”

 

Met Parking Services is a member of the AOS, as per the published list on the BPA website but is most clearly not adhering to the Code of Practice nor to the Notes that the BPA has sent them.

 

I am sending a letter of complaint to the BPA Compliance Officer about this and will keep you informed of the response as I fully expect the BPA to be held to the conditions imposed by the DVLA, by the DVLA itself and to actually do something about this.

 

If they fail to take positive steps then I will of course be in touch with you. As you know the BPA is a private company and so is exempt from Freedom of Information requests and may choose not to send me such supporting as a copy of the personal sign-of to the CoP by Met Parking Services. In which case I will ask you to:-

“• investigate at DVLA’s request any complaints about alleged breach of the COP or inappropriate use of information and report on the outcome.”

 

This 'Charge' is in fact an invoice from a private company and is not

a Penalty Charge Notice. Penalties in civil contracts, where such contracts actually exist, are unenforceable in English law. This is long established as Excel parking recently found out in Court when losing the case they mounted to enforce such a charge.

Much Case Law has been quoted to me in this regard especially, but not limited to:-

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. New Garage and Motor Co. Ltd. (1915).

 

The weight of law in this area, both statute and well established case law, clearly shows that Met Parking Services are not using the information they obtain in a "fair and responsible manner". Hence their 'cause' is 'unreasonable'.

 

Assuming that the DVLA have assessed Met Parking Services on their behaviour on the use of the data that you have supplied, I formally request a copy of that assessment.

From the information on the DVLA web site it is apparent that Met Parking Services should have used form V888/2 to request my details from you and that they also have to supply adequate information to The DVLA in order to qualify to use this service. They also have to meet well stated conditions in their business operations and in their use of the data that you supply.

I formally request a copy of their request plus all supporting documentation that Met Parking Services sent to you to obtain my personal information in order to issue the attached communications. This includes the documentation required to satisfy:-

 

"Companies acting on behalf of landowners must provide evidence (contract/agreement) from the landowner to confirm that they are acting with the consent of the landowner. Enforcement companies don't have to provide contracts but should supply a letter from the landlord (on headed paper) confirming that they're acting with the approval of the landlord in enforcing parking restrictions.

 

Letters should also include the start and end date of the contract, the locations of sites and if CCTV or manual ticketing is in operation."

 

It is also a condition that:-

"Material evidence should be provided that a penalty charge scheme is in operation and that signs are clearly visible to drivers. You must confirm if CCTV cameras are in operation or if notices are left on vehicle windscreens. Full details of your operations must be included with your application."

 

I request a copy of that material evidence.

 

I fully realise that the DVLA has no authority to regulate any Parking Companies nor to arbitrate in any dispute, I am not asking you to do either of those things. I am asking for Information and pointing out to you the true nature of the business of this client of yours and how they conduct their business and how non-straightforward it is.

 

Based on this evidence plus the supplied outline of just SOME of the laws being broken and the signed-off BPA CoP which the DVLA insists is enforceable I do have the expectation that you will deal with this appropriately according to your own published polices and procedures.

 

I believe it has been more than amply demonstrated that the use Met Parking Services made of the information you supplied is neither lawful nor 'reasonable' and that they are unequivocally in breach of the BPA’s CoP.

 

Yours faithfully.

 

Do you really think they will even read all this?

regards

[crem]

Do you really think they will even read all this?

regards

 

do you even think they can?

[annoyed09]

lol its more to get met services off my back than it is to get DVLAs attention.

 

basically all i wanna do is get the letters sent to my current address - i'll ignore those, even if they send 55 letters.