Comprehensive Management Services Ltd - Robin Park Wigan

dilbertuk

Hi,

I visited the Robin Park retail complex in Wigan last week with my other half, did a bit of browsing in some shops and went to Burger King. I was on site from around 7.15pm to 8.45pm.

When I returned to my car, I had a ticket. The reason for the issue was given as "Left Premesis" (spelt like that).

I complained to the local car park rep who told me to appeal online, which I did as follows :-

"The ticket was issued with a note to say "Left Premises". At no time did the driver leave the retail park. The car was parked in a disabled bay, clearly showing the disabled badge and time of arrival of 7.15pm. Several stores were visited (Next, Smyths Toys, Boots and Costa) before ending up in Burger King as Boots closed (around 8pm). I have attached a receipt to show attendance in Burger King (the time of ordering was 8.18pm). The parking ticket was issued at 8.30pm"

At the weekend I went down to the site and noticed that it says you must not leave the premises which is fair enough. However, there is a sign that you can only see when returning from Burger King that says "Parking Restrictions Apply Beyond This Point. Please be aware that these retail outlets trading hours are not linked to Burger King" which means nothing to me but in CMS world appears to mean a visit to Burger King (which is part of the park) takes you 'off premesis"

As I am writing this, I've just received an email from them headed "Appeal Received" with the following text:

"Please provide a house/flat number and full postcode, without this information we will not respond to your appeal as we need a full serviceable address for the driver of the vehicle.


Yours Sincerely
CM Services Ltd"

I'm reluctant to provide this in view of what I've read on here today.

Has anyone any advice on how to proceed? I've emailed the shops and expressed my outrage at being ticketed but have had no response as yet.

Any help gratefully received

Many thanks.


****EDIT: Just in case this matters, I am not the registered owner of the vehicle (it's a lease car) but I am the registered keeper.

Guys_Dad

Well, you jumped the gun by not waiting for the NtK and now you are in No Man's land. If you provide Name and address, they don't have to get it from DVLA.

If you don't, they will claim that you are out of time to appeal to POPLA.

Sooner or later, they need your Name and address, so, on balance, I would give it now. Make your appeal as keeper and demand a cancellation or POPLA code.

Tell them that you would want a breakdown of their estimate of costs as of today's date as you believe the charge extortionate, plus a plan of the site showing exactly the demarcation between Burger King and the other parking spaces and also [point out that you will be challenging their wording on the signage as it is neither complain in wording or lettering with the BPA best practice guidelines.

Coupon-mad

Not no-man's land. But you are NOT the registered keeper. You are the 'keeper' though.

Just reply, add the query suggested by Guy's Dad (about the lack of demarcation between Burger King and the rest/saying you will challenge their wording on the signage as it is neither compliant in wording or lettering with the IPC Code of practice).


Give your name and address (postal - you should NEVER have emailed an appeal without a postal address, what's the point, this was obviously not acceptable even to this bunch). Say you are appealing as 'keeper' under the definition in Schedule 4 and that if they don't accept your appeal orallow you independent IAS you will complain to the IPC. Remind them that the DVLA jointly issued a strict reminder NOT to delay replies to appeals by pretending that a driver has to be named:

the following practices may be considered as ATA Code breaches and must not be continued:
• Asking the motorist to enter into additional correspondence to obtain a POPLA code
• Failing to include a correct and/or valid POPLA Code (or access to the IAS) within the Rejection correspondence
• Issuing a POPLA Code with a date identifier which is significantly different from the date of rejection
• Appearing to indicate that the issue of a POPLA Code (or access to the IAS) is conditional on driver details being supplied “

"Left Premesis" (spelt like that).

LOL typical numbskulls!

Guys_Dad wrote: »

If you provide Name and address, they don't have to get it from DVLA.

That's a good thing, GD seeing as the POFA 2012 says keeper liability partly depends on the keeper's data having ONLY been obtained from the Secretary of State (i.e. via the DVLA only!).


P.S. Just in case the lease firm gets a letter later on as this isn't a very well-behaved PPC in our view - send a copy of your appeal to the lease firm or Fleet Manager and tell them they must NOT pay if this firm write to them as they have no liability as you are appealing it already. And remind them that this is neither a fine nor an offence and not covered within your terms of use of the car as far as 'fines' might be concerned (Council & Police only). Remind them as well, about the BPA/BVRLA Memorandum of Understanding* about simply providing the name and address of hirer/user of a car if a private firm writes (NOT paying it).




* search the forum for it and also check the lease firm are a BVRLA member, which most are. They should adhere to polices issued by their Trade Body.

Edna_Basher

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Make your appeal as keeper and demand a cancellation or POPLA code.

Unfortunately this lot are in the IPC rather than the BPA; even more reason why it would have been better to wait for the Notice to Keeper.

This means that the process will lead to the lottery of the so-called "Independent" Appeals Service (IAS) rather than POPLA.

Guys_Dad

You write "As I am writing this, I've just received an email from them headed "Appeal Received" with the following text:

"Please provide a house/flat number and full postcode, without this information we will not respond to your appeal as we need a full serviceable address for the driver of the vehicle.


Yours Sincerely
CM Services Ltd"
"

When you reply, you should state that they are in breach of IPC AOS by demanding the driver's n & a and that you are appealing as the registered keeper.

Edna reminds me that they are IPC and, therefore, the signs are important in order that we can see whether they are claiming contract breach or not.

Have we got any photos of the wording??

dilbertuk

Thanks for the responses folks.

I have to say I am a little puzzled over what to do now though.

Do I confirm my name and address with them - but without confirming who the driver was?

I will take photos of the signage and post it up later but the wording is exactly as written above. The sign re Burger King is only viewable on leaving BK but even so I didn't spot it on the night of the 'offence'.

Also, is it worth appealing on grounds of reasonable charge? £100 for less than a couple of hours parking is extortionate by any measure.

The comment regarding notifying the lease company is a good one - they could quite easily just pay and then send me an even bigger bill - but saying that, how easy is it for them to obtain the owners details anyway?

Sorry to sound confused - but that's because I am!

Big_Bad_Dad

dilbertuk wrote: »

Also, is it worth appealing on grounds of reasonable charge? £100 for less than a couple of hours parking is extortionate by any measure.

I'd say per GD's original reply, which I quote, "Tell them that you would want a breakdown of their estimate of costs as of today's date as you believe the charge extortionate", yes definitely contest the figure. I've been away from things a while but if I am not mistaken, charges are still supposed to reflect provable expenses.

Coupon-mad

We need the pictures please and you need to seek out places where there are no signs or where they are obscured or differ from other signs. The entrance is key and the wording is key (photos please, not a typed out version of a sign's words).

Also, is it worth appealing on grounds of reasonable charge? £100 for less than a couple of hours parking is extortionate by any measure.

Not applicable for an IAS appeal - the PPC will argue it is a contractual fee. Pointless just saying it is extortionate or querying the 'cost'.

I have to say I am a little puzzled over what to do now though.

Do I confirm my name and address with them - but without confirming who the driver was?

I thought I had answered this clearly, of course that is what you should have done when first emailing, as I already posted above. You must give your address urgently or they will write to the lease company:

Give your name and address (postal - you should NEVER have emailed an appeal without a postal address, what's the point, this was obviously not acceptable even to this bunch). Say you are appealing as 'keeper' under the definition in Schedule 4 and that if they don't accept your appeal or allow you independent IAS you will complain to the IPC. Remind them that the DVLA jointly issued a strict reminder NOT to delay replies to appeals by pretending that a driver has to be named:

dilbertuk

How do I include an image? There is an insert link button but I can't see how to upload one.

Thanks.

bod1467

You won't be able to yet - not enough posts in the forum.

Simply upload them to a hosting site (e.g. Photobucket, imgur, tinypic or similar) and post the links in a reply here, changing http to hxxp. Someone will convert them to clickable links.

dilbertuk

Hi,

Hopefully this will work...

http://1drv.ms/10y7kHM

Thanks again for your help.

I was going to reply with the following...any comments?


"Thank you for your confirmation that you have received an appeal against an incorrectly applied parking charge.

I note that you are saying you will not respond to the appeal without providing details of the driver of the vehicle which I understand to be in breach of the IPC Accredited Operator Scheme. This will form part of my complaint should the ticket not be cancelled immediately.

The keeper of the vehicle is ....

Kind Regards"


Is this all I need to do at this stage? To be honest, the £100 bothers me - but it's the cheek of these !!!!!!s that is upsetting me more!