PPC "Losses"

trisontana

I thought posters on here might want to pick a few holes in this communication received by a poster over on CAG from a PPC called Secure Car Parks Ltd.

We are in receipt of your email please find our response below:

While we are aware of the rules regarding the protections of freedoms act we are obliged as part of our code of practice with the British Parking Association to inform all drivers of the information regarding the Protection of freedoms act 2012 and the letter sent to you has been approved by them and has to be sent to all motorist from the 1st October 2012 despite when the ticket was issued.

We have permission from the land owner to issue and recover amounts due for parking charge notices on there behalf under trespass or Contract law.

While you are under no legal obligation to name the driver as your ticket was issued before the 1st October 2012 , we have acted reasonably and requested that you provide us with these details if you were not the driver, if you still refuse to give this information we will still proceed to reclaim costs at court on the balance of probabilities and reasonability because :
1. The registered keeper will usually know who drives there car.
2. They have refused to pass on details of whom the driver was ,due to this being a family member or close friend.
The judge will then decided if the registered keeper has acted reasonable by withholding the drivers details.

In regards to our fee of £60 for parking charge notices ,this is reduced to £30 if it was paid with in 14days from date of issue , as you choose to ignore this ticket and not pay the reduced amount or appeal the ticket within the time scale given then the discounted offer expires and the full amount of £60 becomes due.

Our fee of £60 is approved under the Approved Operator Scheme code of practice and does not exceed there recommended amount of £100 and is deemed reasonable I have listed a few of the items our parking charge fees are worked out on using expenses and loss suffered due to none payment of parking fees:
1. Possible max amount of earnings per parking space per day £19.20
2. Parking inspector Wages ...£3.63 per ticket issued
3.Fee To BPA Ect per ticket £32.00
4. admin Wages £2.74
5.Stationery costs £0.50
6.Maintenance of signs £ 6.64
This totals £64.71 and does not include other expenses and losses for us to issue parking charge notices.

If you require any further information please contact me on 0121 308 8857 or at info@securecarparksltd.co .uk.

Payment details are on your letter along with time scales and our process for further action, Again if you were not the driver at the time the ticket was issued we invite you to supply the full name and address and we will send the request to them.

Kind Regards

Louise Sall



So loss of earnings covers parking there for a full day (I was there for about 20 minutes)? the charge has to cover wages, stationary, toilet roll (which they have to pay regardless).

The Poster would welcome any suggestions to frame another email to these clowns.

Sirdan

The judge will then decided if the registered keeper has acted reasonable by withholding the drivers details.

Which in law has no bearing whatsoever on the liability of the keeper to pay the ridiculous amount claimed.
Unreasonable or not the keeper if not the driver can not EVER be liable for a pre 1st October scam ticket.

As already commented on, most , in fact probably all, of the "losses" claimed should also be dismissed by an impartial judge.
Most of them are what is known as business costs i.e. the normal cost of running the business regardless and as such they are offset by the companies profits.
If they need to claim business costs as losses because their profits don't cover it perhaps they shouldn't be running a business at all !! :rotfl:

trisontana

The losses have to be those suffered by the landowner and not the PPC's.

The_Slithy_Tove

Apart from their inability to spell...

Most of those "losses" are normal business costs, and cannot be deemed as losses (see the Ibbotson/Scun thorpe case). The only item which they might get away with is the Possible max amount of earnings per parking space per day £19.20 for which they'll have to justify the actual amount (how long was the space actually occupied, was the car park full, ...).

Frankly, it's a load of rubbish.

Sirdan

trisontana wrote: »

The losses have to be those suffered by the landowner and not the PPC's.

That's a very good point unless the landowner can show that these costs are passed on by the PPC then what actual losses has the landowner incurred? ,Probably none ..as usual.

Sirdan

We have permission from the land owner to issue and recover amounts due for parking charge notices on there behalf under trespass or Contract law.

Methinks this PPC has not taken onboard HMRC vs VCS.

Regardless of any "permission" the court ruled,as I understand it, that :-

1) Only a party with a propietary interest in the land can bring a claim for tresspass ..that will be the landowner not the PPC.

and

2) Only the landowner can form a contract with the driver not the PPC ...

It follows that the PPC can not and will not be taking any court action and as usual should be ignored.

peter_the_piper

As the current losses include the £32 for popla, how can 1) this be loss if the driver pays and does not go to popla &
2) how could the fee before 1Oct have been similar without popla.?

Sirdan

While you are under no legal obligation to name the driver as your ticket was issued before the 1st October 2012

Naughty PPPC ,very very naughty in fact ..because the keeper is not legally obliged to name the driver even after 1st October.

Sirdan

Parking inspector Wages ...£3.63 per ticket issued per ticket issued

..what are they saying ??

If he only issues one ticket in a day that's all they wil pay him ? (Clearly not legal)
Or he is paid a bonus for issuing the ticket ...that's their choice it's certainly not a recoverable "loss" ..because it is self inflicted.

Sirdan

.

Maintenance of signs £ 6.64

How does the issuing of tickets degrade the sign and therefore incurr a maintenance charge ?
Surely the signs are maintained regardless of how many tickets are or are not issued.

As commented by a judge previously anyone who wants to present this to a court best bring a tootbrush !!

cgk1

The whole thing is bunk.