Parking ticket - HGV - Proserve Enforcement Solutions

[kregrs]

I'm a freelance HGV driver, now self employed but at the time of the alleged offence I was paye with an agency. It was brought to my attention today that I have started paying, through deductions on my invoice, for a parking ticket I allegedly received whilst working. On questioning the agency, it seems that the client I was working for have paid the ticket, and I'm expected to reimburse them, although I am not happy and wish to contest the ticket. Is this possible, considering I am alleged to have been the driver on the day but I am not the vehicles keeper and the fine has been paid?

 

Now, some details. The ticket was issued by Proserve Enforcement Solutions, allegedly at 15:08 on 02/12/13 at BP Service Station, Anzani Avenue, Felixstowe. There is no mention of what offence I am supposed to have committed, bar a mention of the vehicle having breached the landowners terms and conditions by parking/waiting/stopping without due authority or permission. Furthermore the vehicle committed an unauthorised trespass. The charge is £300, or £180 if paid within 14 days.

 

There are cctv stills of the vehicle (44t Artic and trailer) parked at the back of the garage on double yellow lines, these images seem to have no time or date stamp, although the copy I have is photocopied and I have asked the agency to forward the email with clearer images to me so I can check those.

 

For anyone that knows the site, there are circa 16 parking bays for HGV, along with pumps for both car and hgv, with a truckwash on site and small cafe and toilet block. The site can get very busy during the day, and its not unusual to find all the hgv bays taken, which isn't much help when you're close to running out of time and need to take a tacho break, which may have been what happened here. To be honest, I cant remember, and until I can check my digi card and do a printout for the day in question, I won't know.

 

 

Google maps image of the service station, the red squiggle being where I was parked.

The current situation is they allow 2hrs free parking, after which you must pay, and you must park in the marked bays. There are enough signs dotted around the place mentioning this.

 

 

So, your views please? Can I contest, being that I was the driver but the haulage company have already paid and are looking to recover the money from me. It is mentioned on the notice that the name and address of the driver is unknown, and that the keeper may pay the charge, or pass on the details of the driver for them to contact me, and that they have 28 days of the date of service of the letter to pass on my details or pay the charge or they themselves become legally liable for the charge.

[dx100uk]

pro serve are still a ppc

 

so popla applies.

 

as for linking the word 'legal' with anything to do with a ppc speculative invoice..

 

in the same thread is well....

 

dx

[havinastella]

Hi, firstly it's not a fine, it's an invoice.

 

Second, you'll need to see what your contract with the company that is paying it says. As they have paid it, you are struggling.

[kregrs]

Hi, firstly it's not a fine, it's an invoice.

 

Second, you'll need to see what your contract with the company that is paying it says. As they have paid it, you are struggling.

 

My contract is (was) with the employment agency,

 

I had no contract with the haulier,

 

although I'll consult the agency on what the deal is...

 

So as they've paid it,

 

I just have to lump it and take the hit?

 

Today was the first I knew of this,

 

I haven't been given the opportunity to contest this,

 

despite the haulier knowing my name and address.

[ericsbrother]

Most contracts will have a clause making you liable for all parking tickets, speeding fines and any other similar things.

 

The problem with these clauses in contracts are that this isnt a parking fine

but an invoice for breach of contract and so is not normally covered by the clauses.

 

This means that any deduction by the agency is unlawful and you can sue them for breach of contract

but that would kill any chance of ever getting work through them again.

 

I bet that the contract between PES and the landowner is as duff as all of the other ones that these companies try and enforce

but they have used wording that has worried the haulage co into paying up because of a case on an industrial estate

where the judge decided that £300 for parking a lorry waiting to enter a factory gate was reasonable as it was a commercial decision,

not one of a private individual with consumer contracts to consider.

 

So, your battle is with your employer, not the parking co and how you wish to proceed that is very much down to your situation.

[kregrs]

So, bearing in mind all whats been said above, would this be an option? As I don't want to be losing out on any work, I don't want to be causing waves at the agency. Likewise, the haulier won't want to be out of pocket. I'm assuming this would have been paid on a debit/credit card, so a chargeback is a possible option for the haulier? Then my details can be given and I can contest this and hopefully come out on top.

[f16]

Sounds to me like "That will do nicely Sir".... If the agency go along with it.

[ericsbrother]

Because you have to speak to the agency and they have to speak to the haulage co it is unlikely that you will get to give a full account of what happened and what you want them to do. Worth a try but it will always be easier for them to take the money out of your pocket rather than start a battle they dont comprehend.

Try and get it down in writing to the agency that any parivate parking invoices(fines) should be forwarded to you for dealing with rather than the company just paying up. It probably wont sink in but worth asking anyway.

[kregrs]

Having explained to the agency about this 'invoice', they're in the process of asking the haulier to do a chargeback, and to pass my details on as the driver.

It might be a minor detail, but the alleged 'offence' was on the 02/12/13, no ticket as it was captured on cctv, letter to haulier requesting details or payment is dated 23/12/13, so 21 days after it happened. From reading other threads on here, shouldn't this have been within 14 days?

[f16]

Correct ..... They are timed out to chase the Keeper. I'm not sure about the Driver. Wait for advice

[ericsbrother]

Yup, that is correct so once chargeback is done the hauliers dont have to say anything to the parking co if they dont feel like it. They should tell their bank that the chargeback is because the parking company misrepresented themselves as to having a claim but didnt. The parking co can still chase you but they will be timed out to notify you of the alleged breach so you can always tell them that you have no recollection of being there and it is for them to prove it was you and no-one else.

Just hope thet the haulage co see it in their interests to hold their nerve and ignore all requests from the parking co. I know where I would be but they may think they are obliged to provide the info asked for.

[kregrs]

I work as a freelance HGV Driver, I work at various local haulage companies in Ipswich and Felixstowe, as and when needed.

 

On 14/10/14 I was driving for a local haulier and stopped at the BP garage on Anzani Avenue in Felixstowe. As all the HGV spaces were taken, I stopped against the perimeter fence, and went in to the shop. The vehicle I was driving was on hire to the haulier.

 

On Tuesday, the haulier received a notice from Proserve, informing them that they had been identified by the hire company as having the vehicle, along with the usual paperwork they send out.

 

I have asked the haulier to supply my details as the driver, as a) they were going to pay and look to me to reimburse them, and b) they are afraid of the rumours of Proserve managing to get them blocked from entering the dock area. They have agreed to do so, and I am just awaiting confirmation this has been done.

 

So, once this has been passed over to me, how do I deal with the matter?

 

In the notice it states that I committed trespass, asking for £250 damages, reduced to £180 if paid within 21 days of 21st November, standard Proserve Enforcement Solutions waffle.

[renegadeimp]

Only a court can find you guilty of trespass. Not a private company. As for claiming that in damages, theyve just shot themselves in the foot big time. What exactly do they attribute that cost to?

[f16]

ANPR job..... What date did the haulier get the letter ???

 

Must be within 14 days of the "offence".

 

£180 to £250. ..... Yeah right. ... "Jokers" or what ??????

 

How long were you stationary for ?

[BankFodder]

The trespass idea is a very interesting idea. Please would you scan the letter so that we can have a look.

 

A claim for trespass by a private parking company is even weaker than a claim for contract. At least in an alleged contract, they can pretend to try and reclaim some pre-agreed price of having overstayed in a parking zone.

 

With trespass, it is very clear that damages must reflect losses. In some circumstances a claimant who is bringing an action in trespass might be able to claim for punitive damages – but that would be exceptional and I don't see anything exceptional here.

[armadillo71]

Have a read of the Prankster;

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/dvla-bans-proserve-from-access-to.html?m=1

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/merriveen-v-proserve.html?m=1

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/ransomes-lose-in-court-proserve.html

[martin g]

Hi,

I've sent you a message about Proserve, and where you should look for the best current info.

Please check your messages.

Martin g

[ericsbrother]

commercial vehicles different to private vehicles as far as contract law goes. the signage where you parked now becomes critical so get a photograph of the signs and theit height, font size, colour, colour of background and any reference to other signage such as "see other signs for conditions"

[kregrs]

I was stationary for the grand total of 6 minutes. As I understand it, it wouldnt be Proserve taking me to court for trespass, it will be the landowner, having already paid Proserve £250 for the pictures, which then becomes the damages. They have confirmed that it is trespass and not a parking charge that their client will be pursuing.

I've been doing my research into Proserve on the net, and seems all is not good for them.

I'll scan up the ticket as soon as I can on the pc.

[ericsbrother]

You have it, proserve promie to pay the LL a sum and claim the losses from you. Problem is the losses are really zero and they are contractually obliged to pay over a sum of about £150. They say that all of the costs of pursuing you add up to whatever the amount is but that is their establishment costs not losses due to your actions. same old con they try on the courts all the time, sometimes it works, mostly it doesnt.

[kregrs]

I'll scan the letter in the next few days. Proserve have the same deal with Ransomes on Ransomes Euro Park in Ipswich. In one of the links above you can see the result of appeal of Ransomes vs Anderson, Ransomes effectively lost. Over the last few days, emails have been pinging back and forth between Proserve and myself, with the last one from me making mention of the Ransome loss in court, and suggesting that if I was to pay anything, it would be the reduced sum of £60, or possibly even £20. Below is their reply -

 

"We are fully aware of the recent appeal case, in which HHJ Maloney overturned the lower Courts decision and awarded Judgment against Mr Anderson, for his unlawful act of trespass.

 

We are waiting for receipt of the Judgement, which is currently being approved by HHJ Maloney, a soon as it is available it will be circulated.

 

We are fully aware of the various internet forums which are deliberately misleading people with the effect of that Judgement. I am satisfied the statements you are making in regards to the recent judgement have clearly been obtained from such forum posts.

 

During the recent Hearing HH J Maloney stated “I suspect that the issues that are raised about trespass, and whether the notice operates – in trespass terms you do not have to prove notice of trespass because trespass is trespass, it is only relevant in trespass as a notice giving rise to a certain measure of damages”.

 

Our clients sites effectively do not have to have Warning notices in place other than Warning Private Property, however our clients choose to give clear warning to tenants and visitors by erecting numerous warning signs, accompanied by double yellow lines.

 

During the hearing HHJ Maloney also stated the claim was not a parking case.

 

The £60.00 damages awarded by HHJ Maloney was the minimum he could award, he stated it was not a precedent.

 

The effect of the recent judgement was not binding on the lower Courts, however it is persuading.

 

We are not aware of the details in regards to the Parking Eye v Beavis case, other than Parking Eye issue Parking Charges, where as our clients do not.

 

Yours faithfully"

 

 

Incidentally, would I have actually trespassed? I parked on their site in order to use the shop and the toilets, all the HGV spaces were taken, with the pumps, a truck wash and a cafe also on the site you can appreciate that vehicle movements are quite high, and with the dedicated spaces taken, trying to park 50ft+ of vehicle so as not to cause an obstruction is quite hard, hence why I ended up stopped against the fence.

[ericsbrother]

again, they are telling lies hhj maloney didnt consider trespass but liquidated damages under a commercial contract.

These people cant claim from you or anyone else for trespass, only the landownwr can and thy have to prove their loss due to the trespass as damages. So, if you knocked a wall over then the rebuild cost is what can be claimed. Nothing can be claimed for parking by invitation in a free car park.

The Ransomes case was lost at appeal by them and is going to the High Court at a cost of some £100k. This is important for them as they stand to lose a massive amount of money as the original case was about charging lorries £250 a pop as a business to business contract, which is different from your case if land was part of petrol station but losing it wil bankrupt them as they are obliged to pay the landlord for every ticket they hand out whether they get any money back or not. No wonder the owners of the land signed up to that!

You might want to try and find out who owns the land where you parked, it may not be part of anything covered by their contract anyway.

[Dublindel]

Interesting..... They claim £250 in damages, an amount that you have cost them. They then reduce it to £180 so they are losing £70. So it would be better for them if they never made a claim. I believe this to be correct your honour...

[DBC]

"unlawful act of trespass.".

So, Proserve pray tell us what particular law of the land has been broke? You don't seem to know the difference between criminal and civil law.

[Dublindel]

Your honour, we have created our own law, the law of [causing problems] anyone and everyone.