McDonalds Parking Fine - MET Parking Services

[Eskiboy]

Hi guys

 

I was recently sent a parking fine by MET Parking Services for staying in McDonalds car park for longer than 75 Minutes.

 

I've just turned 18 and i was 17 on the date of the fine.

 

I have recieved all the usual letters - 'IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE', 'FINAL WARNING' etc etc but i've now recieved letters from Graham White Solicitors threatening me with court action.

 

The only thing im worried about is having my Credit Rating tarnished, is this likely to affect it? I don't know what to make of it.

 

Any advice appreciated!

[kiptower]

it wont and cant effect you credit

 

unless they actually took you to court , 00000000000001% chance of that

 

then they actually won the case even less chance

 

and then you did not pay what the court awarded within 28 days

 

its a mail [problem] IT IS NOT A FINE

 

IGNORE

[Rooster-UK]

Remember that this is not a fine!

 

It is an unenforcible [problem] invoice.

 

IGNORE IT!

 

That "solicitor's" letter was almost certainly sent to you by either the teaboy or the office cleaner.

 

Don't write.

Don't email.

Don't phone.

Don't respond to them in any way.

 

Those letters are just a load of B.S.

They cannot affect your credit rating.

The letters that you have received are not worth the paper they're written on.

 

Ignore.

IGNORE.

IGNORE!

 

If that doesn't work, Then ignore them, some more.

If you've received letters from Graham White "solicitors" then they are almost at the end of the process.

The final stage is that they leave you alone and chase an easier target.

 

If you are uncomfortable about ignoring them, then send all the correspondence to us and we'll ignore them for you!

 

IGNORE THEM!

[buzby]

What AGE you are is immaterial. They just hope you'll pay up and give them a quick profit. You;ve around 6-12 letters to go before they lose interest in you an move on to someone less clued up.

[Blagton]

Ignore.

IGNORE.

IGNORE!

 

If that doesn't work, Then ignore them, some more.

 

 

In addition to Roosters valuable post I have some very important information you must follow.

 

1. Ignore.

2. Ignore

3. Goto 1

 

There we are - I think between us that should do it.

 

..and just for confirmation you have received some junk from a chap going by the name Micheal Sobell using the trading name of Graham White Solicitors.

 

Not to be confused with the "real" Grahaam White Solictiors.

 

Blagton

Edited December 13, 2009 by Rooster-UK
Corrected endless GOTO loop.

[crem]

What AGE you are is immaterial.

 

His age IS material. As a 17yo he could not legally have entered into a contract whether he wished to or not.

[buzby]

Perhaps - but age in relation to this parking offence, ticket etc and any other non-PPC parking issues (which the OP had no cognizance of) has no revelance to a 'proper PCN defnce.

[crem]

buzby, This is a PPC invoice, so age, and the fact he was not of a legal age to enter into a "contract" is a key feature and would prove to be an absolute defence.

[asmodeus]

It will be the standard 2 GW letters sent out by MET in their solicitors disguise and the second one will state that you must reply as this will not go away

 

Guess what - if you do ignore it it will go away

[diskmandave]

I've just turned 18 and i was 17 on the date of the fine.

 

The standard advice here is to completely ignore all communication

and not attempt to enter into a dialogue with these people which I

absolutely advocate.. But I'ld also be absolutely chomping the bit

wanting to know what their response to a challenge would be on the

grounds of age and being unable to enter into a contract because of it..

[Al27]

Do what you like to be honest, as long as you don't pay.

 

They CAN'T and WON'T do a thing. This is a mail [problem].

[buzby]

buzby, This is a PPC invoice, so age, and the fact he was not of a legal age to enter into a "contract" is a key feature and would prove to be an absolute defence.

 

The OP DIDN'T know this - and referred to a 'parking fine'. Perhaps your comments would be better directed at him? *I* was pointing out for something like that, age is of no relevance (and if truth be told, for a PPC is academic anyway) as court action is invariably academic. Ging on about age of contract admisability through age is kinda pointless, because in Scotland - 16 is the 'age' for entering into a contract.

[Mossycat]

buzby, This is a PPC invoice, so age, and the fact he was not of a legal age to enter into a "contract" is a key feature and would prove to be an absolute defence.

 

Actually a minor can enter into a contract for necessities, food is classed as a necessity, if he was parking there to get food then regardless of his age the contract would stand.

 

However, the rest of the case is junk.

 

Mossy

[Al27]

And remedy for breach of contract is what...

[Mossycat]

And remedy for breach of contract is what...

 

Yeah I know the remedies for breach of contract, which is why I said the rest of the case was junk.

 

I wasn't siding with the PPC, I was simply pointing out that in some cases contracts with minors are legal and enforceable (it's one of those weird anomalies that allows a person under the age of 18 to legally buy alcohol)

 

Mossy

[AsItis]

I've also just been pinged by Met acting on behalf of McDs. Having spent a little time looking at the Web and thinking about this, I'm certainly not going to be paying. Given the lack of statutory authority (unlike the police and local authorities), PPCs can only be claiming for some sort of breach of contract (a contract for parking). Point 1 here - there can only be a contract if the terms of the contract are sufficiently known to both parties (i.e. if there are very few signs or they're confusing/not in the right location, there's no contract). Point 2 - For a contract claim, a party needs to suffer a loss, or "damage", which can either be "liquidated" (fixed) in the contract or "unliquidated" (that is, to be quantified when a claim arises). These "PCNs" purport to be "fines" but are more likely to be liquidated damages, but to be enforceable in law, they need to represent "a reasonable pre-estimate of the loss suffered". If they're more than that, they're a penalty for breach of contact and, under English contract law, penalties are NOT enforceable. In other words, these "PCNs" would be legitimate if they were for a few pounds if the car park has similar lost charges. For free car parks, what loss has the PPC suffered? I should say that this is only my personal and intuitive view of this situation. You draw your own conclusions, but I'm confident enough not to pay these cowboys and, as someone with many years' experience as a lawyer, I probably have some idea what I'm doing.

[kiptower]

soz for the PUN you have put it AsItis

 

confirming what many of us advise new posters when the come to CAG for help

 

anyways welcome to the family CAG, and I am sure you may be able to help others in many topics that CAG covers

regards

 

Kip

[lamma]

Good assessment. Also have a look here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/parking-traffic-offences/164651-problems-ppcs-face.html?highlight=problems+ppc+face

[asmodeus]

Am just starting another round of MET scamvoices courtesy of McD's and can re-assure anyone who is uncertain about the ignore route in case it leads to a court appearance.

 

They are an ineffectual bunch who even when asked to proceed to court with all possible haste because I will not pay them a penny still refuse to do so

 

The only consequences that you face are that the recycle bin has more in it:D

[hellwork]

Hi guys

 

I was recently sent a parking fine by MET Parking Services for staying in McDonalds car park for longer than 75 Minutes.

 

I've just turned 18 and i was 17 on the date of the fine.

 

I have recieved all the usual letters - 'IMPORTANT LEGAL NOTICE', 'FINAL WARNING' etc etc but i've now recieved letters from Graham White Solicitors threatening me with court action.

 

The only thing im worried about is having my Credit Rating tarnished, is this likely to affect it? I don't know what to make of it.

 

Any advice appreciated!

Hi, im new in this forum and i wish for an answer to my question about the MET (parking charge notice)the letter has a photo when i drive in and drive out of McDonalds. i have been given it today by post, similar to Eskiboy, 75 minutes limited free estate period and then said i was there for 240 minutes 13/06/10 at 16:30-20:30 pm. im shocked because it was fake, i was working during that time also i arrive home early! so i read the forum thats says to ignore it, i don't know what to do, because to me its a prank (fake) thankfuly i would like a reply as to how i would fight against that kind of things that hit many people, Thank you

[kiptower]

so easy

 

you IGNORE anything they send you they give up in the end

 

they were featured on watchdog a few weeks back , and the advice on there was to make paper planes from their stupid letters

[DBC]

The advice is just the same, just ignore. If you saw the recent Watchdog programme you would have seen a legal expert fold the "parking-charge" paperwork into a paper aeroplane and fly it across the studio. That's how worthless these "threats" are.

[lamma]

Ignore MET. keep all their scammy letters in the drawer.