PPC Case

[cocis]

I have recently received a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) From Excel Parking which has been followed 7 days later by the issue of a "Notice to Owner" demanding payment of £100.

 

I have written to Excel which on reflection may have been a mistake and received a template response from the Company.

 

I have now chosen to ignore further correspondence from this company and write to the BPA and DVLA about the issue.

 

I have opened this thread to provide a chronological history of the case and post all correspondence for your review.

 

Documents to follow... off to the scanner.

[Barsteward]

I'd not bother with BPA, they ain't a sympathetic ear, well, not for joe Public anyway. They are a front for the [problematic].

[lamma]

which is why complaints should be made to them. Illustrative weight. After the BPA has been 'exhausted' (a very quick job) then you can go on to real authorities.

[Barsteward]

which is why complaints should be made to them. Illustrative weight. After the BPA has been 'exhausted' (a very quick job) then you can go on to real authorities.

Fair and valid point.

[cocis]

Here is the first correspondence that arrived through my letter box.

Note I was not the driver of the vehicle.

I dont want to say too much as I am concious of the fact that these companies trawl the forums looking for evidence.

 

Notice To Owner

Page 1:

 

Page 2:

 

Astounded by the cost of the parking charge ?I did some research on the internet and posted the following template response.

 

Dear Sir or Madam

 

I refer to the above PCN dated XX/XX/XX which was sent to me as the Registered Keeper of this vehicle. It should be noted that this is the first correspondence I have received on the issue.

 

As you are aware this incident is covered by Contract Law which can only be agreed by the parties that entered in to the contract. In this case the driver of the vehicle who may or may not have read the sign.

 

This vehicle is used by several drivers and therefore I would request further photographic evidence in an attempt to establish the identity of the driver who entered into the contract.

 

These should be a clear and concise picture of the driver of the vehicle. The photographs should show the time and date of the incident and be accompanied by a copy of the latest calibration certificates from the independent contractor that verifies the timings of the cameras that take these photographs. Also supply a copy of the Parking Charge Terms and Conditions plus evidence of under whose authority you are acting.

 

Secondly I would like to bring your attention to consumer legislation called the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999).

 

 

In particular the Schedule 2 Indicative and Non-Exhaustive List of Terms which may be Regarded as Unfair

 

(e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfill his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation.

 

The amount of £100 for an overstay in a car park whose annual permit is a mere £25 per annum certainly is captured within the spirit of this clause. For damages to be justifiable and enforceable by the courts they must be a reflection of actual loss. Please can you explain how the breach of this contract resulted in the loss of £100 to yourselves?

 

Unless you can supply ALL this information within 7 days I am afraid I can help you no further and ask that you cancel this notice forthwith.

 

 

 

Yours Faithfully,

......................

 

In reply I received the following from Excel

 

...............

"In response to your ceorrespondence received Day/Month/Year 2009 we acknowledge your statement that you are the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, however you were not the driver on the day when the parking contravention was committed at XXXXXX.

 

In view of this fact we request you provide us with the name and address of the driver in charge of the vehicle on the said date so that we may pursue this matter of the outstanding charge accordingly. Pursuant to paragraph 4.2 of the Pre-Action Protocol, we must advise you that this is a reasonable request in order that we may undertake the early and full exchange of information about the prospective legal claim and to enable the driver the opportunity to avoid civil proceedings by settling the charge before commencement of proceedings.

 

 

Failure to provide the information as requested may constitute a non-compliance of the pre-action protocols and could result in Court Proceedings being brought against the vehicle registered keeper and judgement obtained for failing to adhere to said protocols and liability for the charge outstanding.

 

Furthermore as the registered keeper of the vehicle you are legally required under the road Traffic Act to ensure that any vehicle legally registered to you, if not driven by you, s driven by a person to which you have given your consent and can verify that they are legally licensed and insured to do so.

 

In support of our position we must draw upon the recent decision made in Combined Parking Solutions v Mr Stephen J Thomas [2008]. The Court found that the identity of the driver will be proved based on the balance of probabilities. As such we maintain that you were either the driver on the day in question, or you are privy to the driver's identity. should the latter be true we ask that you assist us by forwarding the driver's contact details so that we may resolve this matter accordingly.

 

However should you refuse to comply with the above, we must inform you we have enough evidence to warrant the pursuit of the debt with yourself. should this matter proceed to the County Courts then you will be required to provide a Statement of Truth as to whether you were the driver or not. Providing false information in a Court of law would be committing an act of perjury. furthermore as per the Pre-Action Protocols you are called on to act in a manner which facilitates the successful resolution of a dispute claim. In the event you act in a manner intended to stall or confuse the process this shall counter against your position during Court proceedings. Merely claiming that you were not necessarily the driver on the date of the contavention is not satisfactory in accordance with the aforementioned.

 

We note your comments about Contract Law. a person can enter into contract either by expressly agreeing to do so, or by acting in such a way that he/she can be said to have implied agreement to enter into contract. Where notice is given too a motarist of the consequences of parking in a particular area, by implication a motorist enters into contract with Excel PArking Services Ltd and accepts the Terms set out in the Notice by proceeding to park. A recent decision in the Court of Appeal has confirmed that provided that adequate notice of the consequences of parking in contravention is given the person parking accepts the terms as set in the Notice and therefore, consents to the risks and consequences.

 

Regarding your request to provide you with the picture of the driver of the vehicle. We must advise that to pursue this matter we are not obliged to take or produce photographs of the driver of the vehicle in question. when our Parking Attendant issued the Notice he recorded the following statement, ' Parked on XXXXXX after 30 mins for loading/unloading' This statement has been recorded on our copy of the Parking Charge Notice. It is a legal document which can be produced as an evidence in court should the matter proceed that far.

 

Regarding your comments about the cost of Parking charge Notice. Please be advised that our charge of £100.00 bear direct correlation to the contravention that you have committed when parking on private land. The £100.00 is inclusive of the Charge to the DVLA whenrequesting your personal details as you did not respond to the Original Parking Charge Notice. It also incorporates the postage and packaging of any correspondence from us and also any additional fees relates to the recovery process. This also explains why we offer a reduced charge if the debt is settled within the first 7 days of the issue date.

 

Please ensure you provide requested information or payment of £100 by XX/MM/YY. Failure to comply will result in the issue of court proceedings whereby further costs will be incurred."

 

...............

 

 

Note I have looked up the charge for the DVLA request and it appears to be about £2.50 add to this the cost a of a few stamps and the cost of any contravention and we are a long way short of the £100 claimed.

 

I will post the letters I am planning to write to the DVLA and BPA next....

Edited April 6, 2009 by cocis

[crem]

If you look back at their "Notice to Owner" their preferred method of payment is to "www.excelparking.co.uk/FINE_payment.htm"

 

Now, just how are they going to present this to a court at the same time claiming this is not a FINE, but a parking charge?

[lamma]

for Perky inspired rubbish. Pre Act protocols reference is spurious (i.e. rubbish) as is the Thomas case reference. copy everything to trading Standards and complain about Excel breaching the The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 No.

[kiptower]

total tosh their reply

 

as in this, it refers to the RTA which does NOT APPLY in private car parks

 

Furthermore as the registered keeper of the vehicle you are legally required under the road Traffic Act to ensure that any vehicle legally registered to you, if not driven by you, s driven by a person to which you have given your consent and can verify that they are legally licensed and insured to do so.

 

you are NOT required under the road Traffic Act regarding private property ,

 

File the lot under rubbish and dont waste your time with them

Edited April 6, 2009 by kiptower

[Al27]

Seen that template response before.

 

Why on earth did they try court a couple of years back with such paperwork? Unsurprisingly they got bolloc*ed, so I'm confused why they still persist with that criminal piece of tat.

 

They must know that they'll never do court again, so they just continue sending out their hollow threats.

 

I'd love to get that through the door. Imagine the fun to be had!

[peterlucas]

"Regarding your request to provide you with the picture of the driver of the vehicle. We must advise that to pursue this matter we are not obliged to take or produce photographs of the driver of the vehicle in question. when our Parking Attendant issued the Notice he recorded the following statement, ' Parked on XXXXXX after 30 mins for loading/unloading' This statement has been recorded on our copy of the Parking Charge Notice. It is a legal document which can be produced as an evidence in court should the matter proceed that far."

 

The fact that their employee has recorded something that is not independently verified and may or may not be true is of little probative value.

 

Regarding your comments about the cost of Parking charge Notice. Please be advised that our charge of £100.00 bear direct correlation to the contravention that you have committed when parking on private land. The £100.00 is inclusive of the Charge to the DVLA whenrequesting your personal details as you did not respond to the Original Parking Charge Notice. It also incorporates the postage and packaging of any correspondence from us and also any additional fees relates to the recovery process. This also explains why we offer a reduced charge if the debt is settled within the first 7 days of the issue date.

 

DVLA fee £2.50 + stamps and letter production (from template presumably) + parking for a short period.

 

If they bring legal action they will have to prove you were the driver and you will be able under CPR31.14 to request a full breakdown of costs incurred by them as a result of the alleged default.

[lamma]

more Perky inspired madness from Excel. they carry on like this and we will have to call then Pinky Excel.

[Rob S]

Quoting a case which only went to the small claims court as if it sets a precedent is very disingenuous. The verdicts in small claims courts do not set a legal precedent.

[Barsteward]

I've got several of them letters. And, funnily enough, several of the same reply.

Still waiting for them to take up the challenge.

[cocis]

How long since the original contravention for you Barsteward? Just want to get a feeling for how long they continue this nonsense before they give up?

 

I guess this is what we can expect when you put the management of car parks into the hands of private companies. The reality is people wouldnt mind paying it if it was a fair and proportionate charge, what we dont want is our money going into the MD annual bonus payment.

 

Interestingly enough this is an outsourced contract for a University Campus and the University Parking Policy includes the following statement

 

"Failure to comply with the above regulations will result in action being taken by the Operator or the University and the imposition of a penalty fine. NOTE: PENALTY FINES IMPOSED BY THE OPERATOR CANNOT BE OVERTURNED BY THE UNIVERSITY. ALL APPEALS, CORRESPONDENCE, DISCUSSION, ETC REGARDING A PENALTY FINE MUST BE CONDUCTED DIRECTLY WITH THE OPERATOR. Any person against whom action is taken by the University, as a result of a breach of the above regulations which cannot be enforced by the operator, is entitled to appeal through the mechanism of existing University policies and procedures. The appeal must be on the grounds that the offence was not committed or that for any reason a penalty ought not to be imposed. Appeals must be made in writing within 14 days from the date of notification of the commencement of the action."

 

If the University has outsourced their operation, how do they have a legal right to take action under contract law.

Secondly why are they using the word Penalty Fine in their car Park policy?

 

Do you think I should write to them and point this out?

[Al27]

Copy in the SU and law department if they have one.

[Barsteward]

How long since the original contravention for you Barsteward? Just want to get a feeling for how long they continue this nonsense before they give up?

It varies.

Ignore them completely and they (Excel) seem to give up after about 3 letters over a couple of months.

Make any contact with them and they persist a while longer. 4-5 letters.

 

Play games with them and the fun can go on for quite a while. Challenge them and they can't resist replying.

Every letter you get from them will contain enough errors, lies, unlawful statements etc to embarrass them in front of a Judge - so don't worry about them taking you to see one.

 

They don't appear to understand the rule of holes.