Lease companies paying Parking Eye charges

Fergie76

This is neither a fixed penalty charge, fine, congestion charge or any other penalty in connection with the car.

It is a private invoice that had been sent to you would have had the option to ignore it, pay it or appeal it.

The hire car company are denying you those rights. Not only that they are breaching their own T&C's, as I have already stated it is none of the above.

I would write them a strongly word letter stating that if they take any unauthorised money from your account, you will send them a notice of action, and should they fail to repay your money, you WILL issue a claim through the Small Claims Court.

Half_way

Seymour73 wrote: »

The lease company have now sent the T&Cs. The relevant para reads:

2.2 You must pay all fixed penalty charges, fines, congestion charges or any other penalties in connection with the Vehicle or its use. If we pay or transfer liability to you for any of these sums on your behalf you will repay us upon demand any sums so paid and an administration fee.

It does seem to be a far reaching clause!

The parking eye chage is non of the above, as it is not ( technicaly) a fixed penalty, fine, congestion charge, or any other type of penalty, it is however a speculative invoice.

As this charge is not covered by the terms and condiotns, if the lease company choses to pay it then its off their own back, and they can not pass on the charge or any associated admin fee on to you if they do then they are in breach of their own terms and they must refund you all the money ( fee paid to parking eye) and any admin fees in full

Coupon-mad

billywhizz wrote: »

Just to give some balance, my wife works for a major leasing company (Not Network), this came up last week with their admin department.

She was given a list of customers to contact who have not paid or contacted the relevant parking companies regarding their debts. The lease company stalled with the private parking companies for as long as they can (6 months) and kept the debts at the initial level, however there comes a point where they are obliged to pay, their view being

1 - As registered keepers of the vehicle, since the law change last year they are liable for the debt
2 - If they cannot prove that the driver of the vehicle has been in touch with the parking company they cannot avoid the debt
3 - Last time they tested this in court they lost!

The advice she was given to pass on to drivers was contact the parking company and give them your details, copying in the leasing company so they are aware you have made contact. From that point on the lease company no longer regard any liability as resting with them and what the driver does from then on is between the PPC and the driver.

For the record they get, on average, some kind of fine, penalty notice etc every 45 seconds every day, that gives you some idea of the volume of these that companies have to handle.

Please don't try to 'balance things' by posting stuff saying wrongly that 'a registered keeper becomes liable when a driver doesn't pay'. NOT TRUE.

Stupid lease company, jeez they only have to ask the BVRLA!

Not only that, if the Lease co. Admin Dept could be bothered to get it right they would NEVER be liable for these at all once they'd named the driver - could never be taken to Court AT ALL. They only have to name the driver...it's written into the Protection of Freedoms Act itself. Hardly difficult to understand.

AK4LH

Thank you guys for this thread, it's been very informative to me! I have just sent this to my lease company (ARVAL) after they decided to tell me that they had paid £100 to a private parking company without telling me:

Hello,

I would like to dispute this with Arval for two reasons. See Section 10.1 of my lease contract:

“In respect of any responsibility, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, or expenses, including legal fees, and any liability resulting from legislation for the payment of fines or penalties for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions in connection with Vehicles (the "Liability"): (a) ARVAL has no responsibility for the Liability; (b) the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action; and (c) the Hirer indemnifies ARVAL and holds ARVAL harmless against the Liability. ARVAL shall be entitled to charge the Hirer a reasonable administration fee for any work carried out or documentation processed relating to the Liability.”

I refuse to pay Arval £100 because:

A) It says above that “the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action”, and I have not been given the chance to admit or not admit liability, it seems Arval have attempted to take this on my behalf which is not part of the contract, and:
The paragraph above also states “legislation for the payment of fines or penalties for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions”, this is neither of the above, it’s a private parking charge (essentially a speculative invoice), something completely different.

If Arval proceeds to take £100 from my account, they will be in breach of their own Terms and Conditions, in which case I will be forced to take this to a Small Claims Court.

We'll see what they come back with!

bazster

AK4LH wrote: »

Thank you guys for this thread, it's been very informative to me! I have just sent this to my lease company (ARVAL) after they decided to tell me that they had paid £100 to a private parking company without telling me:

Hello,

I would like to dispute this with Arval for two reasons. See Section 10.1 of my lease contract:

“In respect of any responsibility, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, or expenses, including legal fees, and any liability resulting from legislation for the payment of fines or penalties for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions in connection with Vehicles (the "Liability"): (a) ARVAL has no responsibility for the Liability; (b) the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action; and (c) the Hirer indemnifies ARVAL and holds ARVAL harmless against the Liability. ARVAL shall be entitled to charge the Hirer a reasonable administration fee for any work carried out or documentation processed relating to the Liability.”

I refuse to pay Arval £100 because:

A) It says above that “the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action”, and I have not been given the chance to admit or not admit liability, it seems Arval have attempted to take this on my behalf which is not part of the contract, and:
The paragraph above also states “legislation for the payment of fines or penalties for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions”, this is neither of the above, it’s a private parking charge (essentially a speculative invoice), something completely different.

If Arval proceeds to take £100 from my account, they will be in breach of their own Terms and Conditions, in which case I will be forced to take this to a Small Claims Court.

We'll see what they come back with!

If they have your credit card details you should've told them that you expressly refuse them permission to make any charges to your account with respect to this or any other speculative invoice, and should they do so anyway the charge will be reported to the card company as an unauthorised transaction.

Please start a new thread if you want to discuss further.

AK4LH

bazster wrote: »

If they have your credit card details you should've told them that you expressly refuse them permission to make any charges to your account with respect to this or any other speculative invoice, and should they do so anyway the charge will be reported to the card company as an unauthorised transaction.

Please start a new thread if you want to discuss further.

Thanks Bazster will do!