MET ANPR PCN - left site - Southgate Park Stansted **CANCELLED BY STARBUCKS**

[DragonFly1967]

If this is the case then do I lodge an appeal using that as part of the grounds and asking that they do not contact the keeper further?

 

Nope, no appeal.

They'll just ignore you anyway.

So, you do absolutely nothing bar let MET waste all of their money on sending you increasingly desperate and threatening demands for payment.

 

Then they'll be paying a few quid to their pet debt collectors to write you some more pointless letters and finally they might stump up a few more beer tokens to get their tame "solicitors" to write to you and threaten you some more.

 

Unfortunately for MET, they have failed to meet the requirements as set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Schedule 4. Which allows them 14 days (from the day after the parking event) to write to the vehicle keeper. So, no keeper liability can possibly be established.

 

If they are stupid enough to take this all the way to a court.

1. They will lose. And

2. You counter claim against them as they have breached the Data Protection Act by obtaining and then processing your personal information without lawful reason.

 

This will then cost them even more money.

 

Following their loss at court, you then make formal written complains to the BPA Ltd, the DVLA and the Information Commissioner. Though the latter is the only one with any actual teeth, it'll give someone at MET a headache and will serve to teach them (yet another) valuable lesson.

[DragonFly1967]

Re-reading the OP, I am a little confused as to how an ANPR system would know that the driver had walked off site.

 

OP, could you scan in and upload anything that you've received from MET in PDF format please. Remove anything that identifies you, the vehicle registration and any PCN codes, Bar or QR codes, but leave everything else.

 

I just want to be certain as to what we're dealing with here.

[DragonFly1967]

I've looked at the site on Google Streetnosey and I assume that we're talking about the one with McDonalds (nearest the entrance) then Starbucks and then some other shop shoved in the carpark in a portacabin

 

If so, I absolutely agree with you that the signage looks like someone in the Met 'signs' department has gone potty!

 

"The Site" as any reasonable person would presume, is the whole of the area. If you'd nipped round to the BP garage then yes, you've left "the site", but as Starbucks don't sell Big Mac's, it would be unreasonable to expect a driver to move the car from one area of a single car park to another to satisfy some sort of daft term on a sign just so that they could eat.

 

MET Parking know this, but they live in the hope that 'normal' people don't cotton on to the con and just pay up without asking any awkward questions or making life difficult for them.

 

.

 

If they've used CCTV to monitor the drivers movements throughout the site then apart from having far too much time on their hands, they're way outside of the time allowed by POFA to issue a NtK. The point I was trying to make is that if there is some muppet from MET Parking on site that has issued one of these "magical disappearing windscreen tickets" then they might be in time to issue the NtK, but from what you say, that does sound doubtful.

 

It's all going to hinge on exactly what it says on the NtK.

[DragonFly1967]

Well, as there's not been a windscreen ticket then they must be relying on ANPR. So they've not got a cat in hells chance of this going any further (other than all the 'junk mail' that you're going to get from them and their pet snakes).

 

Just sit back and smile as you watch them waste their money trying to get you to pay

[DragonFly1967]

There is an article on Met parking and MacDonalds in today's Daily Mail

 

Today's? That article is from 2014

 

Although I agree with the rest of your post

[DragonFly1967]

Well, no ticket on the windscreen means that it was ANPR and they were out of time to form keeper liability. They can only go after the driver, and as they don't know the identity of the driver...

 

I'd completely ignore them and let them do all the chasing and allow them to waste their money.

 

As I said, you'll get lots of 'threatening' letters from DCA's and "solicitors" full of 'if', 'may', 'might' etc, but there's absolutely nothing they can do to you as keeper. And if they're stupid enough to try and take this to court, it'll be a very easy win for you and a nice day out at their expense