Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

MET ANPR PCN - NtK - BP Blue Boys Tonbridge - Burger King Car Park NOT BP car park. ***Cancelled***


Recommended Posts

Hi CAG Team,

I'm seeking your skills and help for a NtK my partner received through the post earlier this week.

To give a little backstory,

my partner and I, along with our young children (4 and 7), decided to go on a camping holiday about 3 hours away from us.

We took a car each because we didn't have enough room in one car.

We arrived at the services at very similar times as we followed each other the whole way. So, two cars.

My partner has received this NtK, but I haven't.

This NtK dropped through the front door on Wednesday, June 5, 2024. 

We both parked in the Burger King car park, not in BP; we got out, all went for a toilet break, got some food from the BP garage and returned to our cars to eat. 

After eating, we took the kids to the toilet again before leaving to complete our journey.

I didn't notice any parking restriction signs and can't get back to the location due to how far away it is.

I noticed another person had an issue here and reported it to you, and they managed to get the charge dropped.

See below.

To me, it looks like they have cameras at the complex's entrance and exit.

I'm not sure if they own the land/car park by Burger King, I'm not sure if this is a legal contract or not. 

I find that 30 mins limit at a Services that serves hot food to be ridiculous and unfair, especially as we had kids to feed and water. 

And the fact that I didn't receive the same NtK despite us driving in and out together is just crazy.

This is the location - I also uploaded a map image.

MAPS.APP.GOO.GL

★★★☆☆ · Restaurant

1 Date of the infringement 24th May 2024

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 29th May 2024

3 Date received 5th June 2024

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] N

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Y - Only entering and exiting the complex/land.

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] N

7 Who is the parking company? MET

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] BP Blue Boys, Tonbridge TN12 7HE

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. POPLA

I hope you can help me out with some guidance on how to proceed with this.

Let me know if you need anything else.

Thank you,

Passerby0233

2024-06-08 13_17_52-Burger King - Google Maps — Mozilla Firefox.pdf NtK_29-05-2024.compressed.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to MET ANPR PCN - NtK - BP Blue Boys Tonbridge - Burger King Car Park NOT BP car park.

The important thing to know is that MET - although they will send you threat after threat about how they will divert a drone from Ukraine and make it fall on your home - hardly ever do court.

Even in the very small number of cases where they send court papers, if the Cagger defends, they drop the matter before the hearing.  They have no real intention of putting their rubbish claim before a judge.  The aim is to find motorists who are terrified of the idea of going to court and who will give in when the court papers arrive.

Thanks for doing the sticky and well done on finding F18's thread.  Do what they did.  On the first page - I think post 19 - there is the address of the CEO of BP.  Write to them, lay it on thick about being genuine customers in the various premises, mention the small kids, the very short stay time, attach any proof of purchase - and request that they get the invoice cancelled.

  • Thanks 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

You pushed me to look at all our MET cases going back till June 2014.  That's 10 years so at that point I got sick & stopped!

MET have never, ever taken a Cagger as far as a court hearing in all that time.

As scribbled above, they have issued court papers a few times but have always bottled before the hearing.

In one exceptional case the motorist didn't even have to defend - the judge chucked out the case due to rubbish Particulars of Claim.

Sadly in two cases MET got a judgment because the motorist didn't file a defence to the claim.  But in one of the cases MET still didn't get their money as the person said he was elderly, didn't need credit and would rather put up with a CCJ than pay MET!

So that's who you're dealing with - paper tigers.  They do court in maybe 5% of cases but even then bottle before it gets to a hearing.

Anyway, let's see what writing to BP produces.

  • Thanks 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the BP update - we'd missed that one!

I'm just wondering why you haven't received an invoice, but your partner has.

It may be that, with one car following the other, MET's ANPR cameras bought for 99p second hand on eBay didn't pick the other car up.

Or ... are you absolutely sure that your car's log book is registered with the DVLA at your correct address?  The last thing you want is correspondence going to an old address.

  • Thanks 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

My car DVLA details are 100% correct and up to date, guaranteed. 

I lived at my address longer than I have owned the car and made sure the details were correct when we transferred ownership of the car, so it's not that. 

It must be their second-hand eBay cameras. 

I've emailed the CEO with evidence and laid it on. 

I will keep this post updated with the outcome. 

Thanks again FTMDave

.  I appreciate the guidance.

I hate these predatory parking cowboys. 

How are they even legal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

cause like you said in post one, 99% of people think these are FINES (it now reads charge).

and wet themselves and cough up.

they are not, they are speculative invoices because the driver supposedly broke some imaginary contract by driving onto privately owned land which said owner may or may not have signed some 99% fake contract with a private parking co years ago, thats already expired or has not been renewed or annually paid to employ them

dx

 

  • Thanks 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet.

MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's.

There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time!

But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic.

Please update us of any developments.

  • Thanks 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car.

If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car.

If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras.

However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change.

The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons.

1. Section 9 [2][a] states 

(2)The notice must—

(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;

The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked.

if you subtract the time you took to

  • drive from the entrance.
  • look for a parking place 
  • park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and
  • unload the children
  • reloading the children
  • getting seat belts on 
  • driving to the exit
  • stopping for cars
  • pedestrians on the way

you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time. 

Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay.

2] Sectio9 [2][f] 

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail.

What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car". 

As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars.

It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone.

I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop. 

You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them.

In the meantime go on and enjoy your life.

Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, lookinforinfo said:

The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car.

If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car.

just to be clear here.....

the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.

  • Like 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both for your expert knowledge and understanding. You're fighting the good fight by standing up for people like me and others with limited knowledge of this stuff. I thank you.

I know all my DVLA details are good. I recently (last year) renewed my license, and my car's V5 is current with the correct details; the same is valid for my partner.

I'll continue to ignore the love letters 😂 and won't let it bother either me or my partner. 

I'll revisit this post if/when I get a letter of claim.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, i just got a reponse back from BP.

Quote

Allow us to offer an update on the case.

We have escalated the case directly with MET parking and after further consideration, they have agreed to cancel the parking fine, therefore you will not need to pay the fine anymore which was sent out to you. 

We apologize once more for the stressful situation and wish you a nice day ahead.

Result.

 

Thank you, everyone, for your advice and help on this; case closed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • AndyOrch changed the title to MET ANPR PCN - NtK - BP Blue Boys Tonbridge - Burger King Car Park NOT BP car park. ***Cancelled***

Well done topic title updated.

Please consider making a donation if not already.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

:cheer2:

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please come back if the second invoice turns up, although hopefully it won't.

Thanks for updating us re the BP CEO too!

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations on your victory, did BP actually use the word 'fine' twice in their correspondence? Or were you paraphrasing it?

Wait for dx to expand and read your post fully!

My time as a Police Officer and subsequently time working within the Motor Trade gives me certain insights into the problems that consumers may encounter.

I have no legal qualifications.

If you have found my post helpful, please enhance my reputation by clicking on the Heart. Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers id be writing back pointing out the parking tickets are private land cannot ever be FINES.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...