MET Southgate Park, Stansted Parking Charge

[CryptoSims]

I recieved this charge from MET at the "Southgate Park" car park.

 

I have read up on this as I see many others have fallen prey to this [problem].

 

The car park in question is linked to the mc donalds "free" car park via 1 entrance and exit to the site, no gates or boundaries to show theyre seperate sites.

 

The driver was parked in the starbucks park where the sign says you have 1 free hour anything after costs via paybyphone.

 

However they claim that because the driver went to Mc Donalds and "left" the "southgate park" site (which youd assume to be the whole lot) therefor they have charged.

 

My question is that the images they have provided on the site shows the driver walking from the vehicle and back. Standing to read the sign etc.

 

As long as I dont suggest who the driver was, could they use the "unblocked" images against the driver?

 

From the previous advice on here it seems best to ignore them as they didnt supply the notice within 14 days and no penalty notice was fitted to the car.

 

Im asking if this is all still valid and if not what do people recommend.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

images/posts removed
.
please do not post jpg picture images directly to a post
.
read upload and redact in jpg then convert using on of the listed websites there to convert to one multipage pdf only

.
that way only logged-in,registered and approved caggers are the only ones that can download and see them
.
else anyone can see them caggers or not

 

 

 

please complete this:

 

[ericsbrother]

DO NOT APPEAL OR RESPOND YET, MET nearly always fail to follow the protocols of the POFA so make their demands unenforceable from the start.

Also look at other cases where the same has been stated for the reason for issuing a charge, it isnt lawful.

post up the redacted version of the NTK and tell us exactly when you received it adn whether you still have the envelope it came in as the postmark will be telling.

 

i have recently helped someone with a demand in sept where the letter was dated the 8th but the postmark was the 10th, making the thing 3 days too late by ther time it dropped on the doormat. Checking with the DVLA showed they didnt access the database until the 10th.

they received a LBA for brach of the GDPR and have now decided they dont actually want the money they were demanding after all. complaint to the ICO made as well so you might be following this path

[Homer67]

I think the OP has already had a NTK?

[ericsbrother]

indeed but we would like to see it. MET ones are usually in latin because they are so far out of time

[CryptoSims]

1. Date of Infringement: 20 Sept 2019

2. Date on NTK: 01 Nov 2019 (6 weeks after infringement)

3. Recieved on 06 Nov 2019

4. No mention of Schedule 4 Protections of Freedoms Act (as far as im aware)

5. Yes there is photo evidence

6. No i have not appealed

7. Parking company is MET Parking Services

8. Southgate Park, Stansted, CM24 1PY

 

They work under BPA

Parking Notice 01-11-19.pdf

[ericsbrother]

So MET as cr4p as usual. Definitely dont respond and sit it out until they threaten you with a lba or letter before claim and them let them have it with both barrels. We will help you compose a suitable response for that occasion when the time comes. in the meanwhile radio silence

[CryptoSims]

So wait to receive an LBA / Letter before claim and then just post here with a response?

[ericsbrother]

yes.

Expect more threatogarms form various dca's/solicitors acting as dca's. before then though

[CryptoSims]

Ok. Ill update you when the time comes. Ill go buy a big folder to fill with all the fan mail.