MET parking ticket McDonalds

stillmans39

Hi there,

about a month ago I received a PCN issued by MET Parking Services at McDonalds in Southall. I parked the car, went to get some money, popped into a shop, then went to McDonalds to get a burger. When I came out I had a parking ticket. There were signs displayed, which I noted, that the maximum stay is 90 minutes. What I didn't see is that the signs also say 'whilst on the premises' so leaving to get some money out etc is not allowed. I appealed to MET Parking on the grounds that I was a paying customer using one of the templates on here. Unsurprisingly, it has been rejected.

The grounds for rejection seem to be ambiguous. Apologies for quoting at length but this is what they said:

"The terms and conditions of use of the car park are clearly stated on the signs prominently displayed at this site including that there is a 90 minute maximum stay for the use of McDonald's customers only.

A site survey was conducted whilst your vehicle was on the premises and as there was no one to take accountability for your vehicle a parking charge notice was issued. We can confirm that the charge was issued correctly and we are upholding it.

We note you state that the driver was a paying customer, however, the manager of the restaurant signed the survey to confirm that there was no one present to take accountability for your vehicle and to authorise the issuing of this charge"

It seems unclear if they are rejecting the appeal because I was over the 90-minute time limit (which I wasn't) or because I left the premises. I think my argument when I appeal to POPLA will be that the signage is not clear. There is nothing that says customers are not allowed to leave the premises - 'whilst on the premises' implies you shouldn't park your car and go somewhere else without patronising the restaurant. However perhaps I should ignore this angle as they haven't actually made explicit reference to my leaving the premises. So should I just say that I was within the 90 minute time limit and appeal on these grounds?

Also I never received a NTK in the post, only the PCN on the windscreen. Does this make a difference? Very grateful for any help. I have read through the newbies forums and don't think my questions are answered there but apologies if they are.

Coupon-mad

I appealed to MET Parking on the grounds that I was a paying customer using one of the templates on here.

On the forum here, we do not have a template that is silly enough to talk about who was driving, who parked and the pointless, mitigating circumstances story of 'what happened'. Do you mean you were unlucky enough not to check the forum first but only found the (frankly awful) old template in the MSE article which makes ALL those mistakes and in using that, have told them who was driving?

Hope not. Hope you mean you appealed as registered keeper only?

A site survey was conducted whilst your vehicle was on the premises

LOL! NO IT WASN'T! They will have NO evidence of where the driver was:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/met-parking-operate-customer-not-here.html

We note you state that the driver was a paying customer, however, the manager of the restaurant signed the survey to confirm that there was no one present to take accountability for your vehicle and to authorise the issuing of this charge

Even more LOLS! OK then obviously you quote that in your POPLA appeal and put MET to strict proof of same.

I think my argument when I appeal to POPLA will be that the signage is not clear.

Yes that will be one point for POPLA, always is. Every time. Have a look at other recent POPLA appeals on the forum from 2016 only. Go back twenty pages or so on this forum, clicking on every single POPLA appeal thread title and spotting the pattern of normal appeal points used.

Make a draft to suit your case and show us. You have 28 days so plenty of time.

Also I never received a NTK in the post, only the PCN on the windscreen. Does this make a difference?

Yes if you used OUR template (or another forum version) which was written ONLY as the keeper and did not say who was driving.

No if you said who was driving, that appeal point is in the bin.

stillmans39

Coupon-mad wrote: »

On the forum here, we do not have a template that is silly enough to talk about who was driving, who parked and the pointless, mitigating circumstances story of 'what happened'.

Thank you for your help. No, I didn't say who was driving, just that the driver was a paying customer. I will follow your advice and post a draft here. When you say 'pointless ... story of what happened' I assume you mean I should not state that I went to get some money out, but just focus on the fact there is no evidence I was not in the restaurant?

The_Deep

If this ever got to court, (unlikely), think of the fun you could have calling the Parking Weasel, and questioning him/her about any mitigating action they took, what checks they made of lavatories, parked cars and elsewhere within the curtailment.

Guys_Dad

Obviously when the site survey was conducted, the driver was in the loo.

The passenger was deaf and didn't hear anyone asking about the car.

fisherjim

In all honesty, can you really believe that some Muppet car park lackie stands in the middle of McD's with a bell, shouting:

Oh Yea, Oh Yea, would the drivers of the following carriages please identify your selves before the hour stikes, or suffer the wrath of MET and fear of the Marshalsea debtors prison, Oh Yea, Oh Yea!

Absolute cobblers, I wouldn't continue to use a business that allows such a scam!

Coupon-mad

stillmans39 wrote: »

Thank you for your help. No, I didn't say who was driving, just that the driver was a paying customer. I will follow your advice and post a draft here. When you say 'pointless ... story of what happened' I assume you mean I should not state that I went to get some money out, but just focus on the fact there is no evidence I was not in the restaurant?

Yes, concentrate in that section on the fact there is no evidence. The appellant denies that the driver was off site/not a customer of McDs and puts MET to strict proof of this 'site survey signed by the McD's Manager'! You could even include a link to that Parking Prankster blog to show this is a 'smoke & mirrors' con played out by MET for years.

Very glad to hear you have appealed only as keeper. In that case, did you never get sent a Notice to Keeper in the post at all? If not, no keeper liability then!

Ralph-y

would a nice little letter / talk to the manager informing him that he may well be called to court if such arrives at a judges desk ....

and ask him for holiday dates .... so he does not miss it all

Ralph:cool:

stillmans39

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Very glad to hear you have appealed only as keeper. In that case, did you never get sent a Notice to Keeper in the post at all? If not, no keeper liability then!

I'm a bit confused about the NTK. I have received a rejection letter but never received a NTK. I checked POFA 2012 which states:

(4)The notice must be given by—
a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given

Does this mean they have 56 days in total in which to issue the NTK? In which case I should wait until near the end of this 28-day period before making my appeal to POPLA? or does the fact that they have already rejected my appeal without sending an NTK mean they have broken the rules? (the PCN was issued 04/03/16)

Thank you

Herzlos

Do you really think they happened to go in and harrass all of the Mcdonalds customers at the moment you happen to be out of the site? More likely is that someone watched you leave the site from behind a bush, ran across and stuck the ticket on, and never went in.

I mean, do you think Mcdonalds would allow some muppet to come in and do a roll call for cars in the car park several times a day? What happens to customers in the toilet, or that are on their way back to the car?

I doubt they could prove such roll call, so their claim is entirely fraudulent.

Complaint to Mcdonalds, the BPA and the DVLA.

Coupon-mad

stillmans39 wrote: »

Does this mean they have 56 days in total in which to issue the NTK?

In which case I should wait until near the end of this 28-day period before making my appeal to POPLA? Thank you

Yes. We always say to delay it a bit.