Luton Airport fines... with a twist...

phred.phlik

It's the same old story: a 30-second dropoff at Luton Airport (in a massive hurry, motorway closures, etc) generates a "fine" from APCOA.

The twist is that it was a hire car. So the hire company has already passed hirer details to APCOA (and collected a £35 admin fee).

There's a lot in these threads about not naming the driver, but the hire company has pretty much done that (it will have named the hirer, not the driver, but it may have told APCOA that only one driver was named on the hire).

Does anyone have any idea whether this nuance makes a difference?

Thanks!
Phred

neil.net

Check the hire companies terms and conditions.

enfield_freddy

well as per the JLA/VCS scam , remember that by getting your info by electronic means the have to comply with the rules , in this case " Clauses B2, and B2 (a) and (b) in the KADOE agreement detailing the purposes for which RK data can be obtained specifically mention parking only. No references to stopping at all. In my view, this potentially constitutes hundreds of DPA breaches going back to when VCS (and others) started doing this at airports." **




**first posted by Manxred @ the parking prankster

ManxRed

My invoice for Royalties is in the post.

By the way, I made a slight typo, it's clauses B2, and B2.1 (a) and (b). Just for reference.

enfield_freddy

ManxRed wrote: »

My invoice for Royalties is in the post.

By the way, I made a slight typo, it's clauses B2, and B2.1 (a) and (b). Just for reference.

close enough for the OP to research ,
:rotfl:


cheque will be sent !

bazster

I think it unlikely that the hire company will have told APCOA anything other than who the hirer was; by going further than that they would probably be in breach of the DPA.

Even so it hardly matters, GPEOL always defeats APCOA at PoPLA and would do so in a court of law also (not that APCOA ever goes near court).

In fact APCOA's operation at Luton is riddled with holes. One blindingly obvious issue is that the signs at the beginning of the airport's private roads don't mention APCOA at all, so you cannot possibly have entered into any contract with them.

Your biggest issue is the hire company's admin charge. You need to study the terms of the rental agreement closely, and if it says they will levy an admin fee with respect to fines and traffic offences (this is neither) but says nothing about speculative invoices from private companies then you should get onto your card company and demand the refund of an unauthorised payment.

phred.phlik

Thanks all; will report back with results if I get any. Any more thoughts or experiences in the meantime would be gratefully received.

To bazster's point: I've already given up for dead the £35 to the hire company. They do have a contract and no doubt they thought of this when they wrote it. More to the point, they already took the money, and getting money back is always a million times harder than not paying it!

Of course, if it went all the way to appeal, then I could tell the hire co that the charge wasn't "properly applied" (their words) because I'd have a piece of paper saying precisely that. Hopefully I'll never know.

Morale: don't fly to Luton.

Folkiedave

Pleased don't give up the £35.00 for dead. They can only apply this charge for legitimate invoices sent to them. This is not a legitimate invoice.

arabesque_101

phred.phlik wrote: »

I've already given up for dead the £35 to the hire company.

Often the hire company assumes, out of ignorance, that it is a statutory parking fine, and their contracts often have no clause for invoices.

Tell me the name of the hire company and I'll look it up for you.

bazster

phred.phlik wrote: »

To bazster's point: I've already given up for dead the £35 to the hire company. They do have a contract and no doubt they thought of this when they wrote it.

Nonsense, we've seen loads of rental agreements that do NOT cover this eventuality, the majority of them only cover real fines and charge notices, not fake fines from private companies.

phred.phlik wrote: »

More to the point, they already took the money, and getting money back is always a million times harder than not paying it!

Again nonsense. You are not trying to get the money back from the rental firm, you are getting it back from the card company. If you can show that, as per the rental agreement, the payment was unauthorised then the card company must give you your money back. They will refuse initially but if you are in the right they always give in when you insist.

Whether they then go back to the hire company for the money is their problem.

phred.phlik

Credit card protections - yes, that is a fair point; I'd forgotten about that.

It's Enterprise, for the record.

I see wimping out is not an option in this forum!