Met Parking Services parking charge notice at McDonalds Healthrow

Dee140157

Ooh a double dipping case.

But before we go off at a a tangent, read the newbie thread and post on your own thread for any further advice. (see my signature for both of these).

And search the forum for MET POPLA to get a flavour of the successful second POPLA appeals.

The_Deep

Herts_J wrote: »

I received a parking demand from Met Parking Services claiming that I had been in a McDonalds car park for over 2 hours. I obtained the CCTV footage from the McDonalds restaurant, which showed I had entered the car park, bought a drink, left the car park in my car 20 minutes later, then returned to the same car park after about another hour, brought another drink and left after 20 minutes. The footage clearly shows my car leaving and returning. This is bordering on criminality.

No, not bordering on, crossing the border.

This is a matter for a very strong complaint to Weights and Measures/Trading Standards, it is just as much a fraud as a publican giving short measure, or a butcher with dodgy weights.

Herts_J

Herts_J wrote: »

I received a parking demand from Met Parking Services claiming that I had been in a McDonalds car park for over 2 hours. I obtained the CCTV footage from the McDonalds restaurant, which showed I had entered the car park, bought a drink, left the car park in my car 20 minutes later, then returned to the same car park after about another hour, brought another drink and left after 20 minutes. The footage clearly shows my car leaving and returning. This is bordering on criminality.

I phoned Met Parking Services and advised them to check their own CCTV evidence, but was told that I have to prove that I was innocent and not the other way round, which isn't the way it should be. I had a letter from them recently withdrawing the penalty charge - thankfully McDonalds were so helpful by providing the CCTV to me.

Northlakes

With such clear CCTV evidence this material does need sending to the local Trading Standards Dept. Without evidence such as yours they are scuppered in bringing a prosecution against the PPC.


Obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception is covered by the Fraud Act 2006


The Proceeds of Crime Act allows that any profits made by these scammers can be recovered to the benefit of those victims in the past. This penalty is far worse than any fine inflicted by a local court!


I don't like being heavy-handed but it it's your public duty to make available this evidence to Trading Standards.

Dee140157

Doesn't the law of this land presume innocence until proven guilty? Why should PPCs be any different?