MET CCTV PCN - Zipcar Hire have paid it + admin fee!! - Occupants left Carpark - Starbucks Closed - Southgate Car Park Stansted Airport

[foilman]

Hello guys,

 

Long story short

I was using a Zipcar (hire car) to go and pick my partner up from the airport.

I was early so I stopped for a coffee.

I parked in what they consider the Starbucks bit but Starbucks was closed, so I did the classic thing and walked across to McDonald's.

I was there for 40 odd minutes then I left. 

A week or so later I got charged about £75 on my Zipcar account because they automatically paid the PCN issued by MET parking. 

After reading a few threads here I've contacted the CEO of Starbucks and the support team has suggested I contact Euro Garages as it's their land etc.

I've also written to MET parking to complain. 

Question 1: As Zipcar automatically paid the charge on my behalf is it hopeless for me to try and get the money back? 

Question 2: If not then which is the best route to take?

This has become more of a principle thing now than anything else because I know so many people who have been caught by this trap.

Thanks in advance

[FTMDave]

Moved to the private parking forum.

The whole point is that what you have received is not a fine, it is an invoice from a private company.

Therefore Zipcar should not have paid it, and should not have taken the money from you.

Demand it back, and if they don't play ball immediately then start the chargeback process with your bank.

[dx100uk]

it is NOT A FINE.....this is an extremely important point to understand

no-one bar a magistrate in a magistrates criminal court can ever fine anyone for anything.

Private Parking Tickets (speculative invoices) are NOT a criminal matter, merely a speculative contractual Civil matter

hence they can only try a speculative monetary claim via the civil county court system (which is no more a legal powers matter than what any member of Joe Public can do).

Until/unless they do raise a county court claim a CCJ and win, there are not ANY enforcement powers they can undertake other than using a DCA, whom are legally powerless and are not BAILIFFS.

Penalty Charge Notices issued by local authorities etc were decriminalised years ago - meaning they no longer can progress a claim to the magistrates court to enforce, but go directly to legal enforcement via a real BAILIFF themselves.

10'000 of people waste £m's paying private parking companies because they think they are FINES...and the media do not help either.

the more people read the above the less income this shark industry get.

Fine replaced with Charge.

....

 

now I'd go do that chargeback now ring your bank.

time for a snotty letter to Zip to IMHO @Ftmdave.. what do you think...the cheek!!

thread title updated

[Nicky Boy]

foilman,

To put your mind at rest about whether Zipcar are allowed to do what they did, just read their terms and conditions.

[Nicky Boy]

Wonder what will happen after the OP does a chargeback?

Because MET have already been paid, they certainly won't refund Zip!

[dx100uk]

[Nicky Boy]

49 minutes ago, FTMDave said:

Therefore Zipcar should not have paid it, and should not have taken the money from you.

Yep! The PCN tells them exactly what to do... Dob in the driver!

[foilman]

Thanks for all the replies, much appreciated.

1. I've attached the 'violation notice' that Zipcar sent back to me with this email:

Hi Thomas,
Thanks for contacting us. 
Please see attached a copy of the violation notice which has been attributed to your account. 
Kind Regards,
Zipcar

2. I've attached the reply from MET too.

Thanks Dave, I think this might be the only solution, although I'm not overly confident the bank will agree or help out here.

It seems like everyone just turns a blind eye to these companies as if they're just and correct

. How the hell do they get away with it?

 

 

Zipcar Violation Notifice.pdf MET Appeal Reply.pdf

[foilman]

The bank told me that they can't deal with invoices or fines. They say I need to speak with the company (Zipcar) and if I'm not happy with the outcome then I should take it to Citizens Advice.

I am not surprised.

[FTMDave]

What utter bunk.

I did chargeback myself for the first time around a year ago thanks to advice on this forum.  Of course you can go for chargeback on an invoice.

My bank has a policy of having to give the retailer 14 days to sort it out first, I would guess your bank will be similar.  Who do you bank with?

You need to stop calling what you have received a fine though.  It isn't.  It's an invoice from a private company.  That isn't just semantics, if you start using the word "fine" to Zipcar or the bank they will say, quite rightly, that Zipcar are entitled to pay the amount plus deduct an admin charge for a fine (actually a council Penalty Charge Notice).  The point is that it is not a fine/Penalty Charge Notice.

[lolerz]

You TELL them (not ASK them!) to issue a chargeback. They will kick up a fuss but you DO NOT get off that phone until they issue the chargeback.

You DID NOT authorise Zipcar to take that payment, you have every right to take it back!

 

[FTMDave]

Damn right.

Personally I'd put it in writing and quote their own policy to them so they can't wheedle out of it.

Hopefully the OP will confirm which bank this is and we can look up the small print.

[foilman]

Santander. I'm on the phone now and they've put it through to the fraud department.

[dx100uk]

[foilman]

I'll let you know what comes back

[FTMDave]

My own bank tried to fob me off from actually using chargeback and tried to push me to only dispute the transaction.

Anyway, Santander chargeback details -

https://www.santander.co.uk/assets/s3fs-public/documents/chargebacks-and-disputed-transactions.pdf

[FTMDave]

Their disputed transaction stuff -

Disputing a credit or debit card transaction | Santander UK

WWW.SANTANDER.CO.UK

---

Received something faulty, damaged, or been charged incorrectly? If you paid with your Santander credit or debit card, we may be able to help refund the...

 

[lookinforinfo]

I feel Met parking took a liberty when they sent the PCN to Avis. They knew that they were dealing with a Hire company yet the PCN did not contain any informaton to Avis on how to deal with the PCN.

Had Avis been told that they could provide certain information to Met in order to avoid them being liable for  the debt should the hirer not pay. But of course by not giving that information Avis decided to pay straight away, to cover themself at half price, and once they  paid there is virtually no way to get that money back from Met.

It is interesting that they charged you with an overstay rather than leaving the car park to go to McDonalds. One would think that the free time would therefore have been 30 minutes. Given that you are entitled to a ten minute grace period and they have used cameras to record your arrival and departure times which is not the parking period that would easily cover the extra minute. It would take longer tan a minute for you to enter the car par and find a place to park and then later drive from the parking spot to the exit which is what the parking period should be.

Pointing these factors out to Avis plus letting them know that these PCNs are speculative invoices and MET don't go to Court since they know they would lose as it is a scam site. Include Joe Lycett's video on Youtube which he did four years ago

They may realise that they were wrong to pay the PCN and repay you without having to go for a charge back.

I have a feeling that the Hire companies do have some sort of arrangement with the parking rogues about how they can pass the charge on to the hirer and not be liable in the future should the hirer not pay the PCN.

[Nicky Boy]

There are quite clear instructions about what to do about the PCN, on the PCN itself...

MET PCN excerpt.pdf

So point out to them that this is what they should have done!

[lookinforinfo]

The trouble is Nicky Boy is that if the hirer does not pay within 28 days, the keeper is then responsible so from that point of view of Avis it is better to pay the reduced sum and claim it back from the hirer rather than risk having to pay £100 and thereby costing the hirer more money.

Many other companies do advise hire companies what to do when the hirer has breached the T&Cs.

Edited February 19 by lookinforinfo

[FTMDave]

Surely all Avis have to do is shop the driver to MET?

Then they're out of the loop.

[Nicky Boy]

My thoughts as well Dave.

The hirer could deny everything, but the signed agreement with Avis covers that.

[lookinforinfo]

The instructions on this PCN are not intended for a Hire company since there is no  mention of the extra details required from Hire companies. Not only do they have to give the name and address of the hirer but also the hire contract and the agreement by the hirer on their responsibility to pay for any breaches.

In the early days of PoFA the parking rogues loved writing to Hire companies as almost of them paid up straight away and then charged their hirers for what they had done regardless of whether the hirer had breached anything at all/

[Nicky Boy]

It's the hire companies lookout. The hirer just needs to do a charge back. 

Once they've been stung a couple of times, the hire companies should learn to do the right thing. 

Unfortunately, the they will always come out as winners...

[lookinforinfo]

I agree that Hire companies should know the process of handling PCNs from private parking companies. At the same time Met when sending a PCN to a Hire company should have sent a PCN with full instructions to the Hire company on how to deal with the PCN.

From their point of view they have had a coup since they have been paid quickly albeit I guess only half the amount they asked for. Had  Avis not paid and complied with the regulations concerning PCNs  Met would probably have received legally nothing from Foilman and Avis would not have been guilty of damaging relations between themselves and their hirers aka customers.

Now they have a problem of their own making. Their hirer is demanding his money back as there is no proof yet of breaching Met's T&Cs and Avis have failed to carry out the instructions on the PCN.