PCS car parking charge - company car

pappa_golf

DCodd wrote: »

That is my point. They can only take a deduction from the driver. They have to be certain that the person they have made the deduction from is the person liable otherwise it is an unlawful deduction from wages.

actually , the terms will say parking offences and moving traffic offences , this was neither , it was a speculative invoice asking for money

DCodd

pappa_golf wrote: »

actually , the terms will say parking offences and moving traffic offences , this was neither , it was a speculative invoice asking for money

A lot of companies are now putting in "charges" these days. But my point was about assigning any liability.

pappa_golf

a lot of companies might be trying to add those words , however they would get short change at an employment tribunal , if they took money for a non legal situation.


you do realise , I could write to the OP s lease co and say he scraped my car , £100 , lets not go thru the insurance , and they pay me , no questions asked




perhaps the OP should find out if the lease Co is a member of http://www.bvrla.co.uk/ , as they have informed their members what to do in cases like this

Umkomaas

DCodd wrote: »

Why could they not name the driver?

They could have named the driver, but equally he is also the keeper on the day, so naming as keeper is a totally legitimate response. PoFA gives the keeper protection, while it provides nothing to the driver.

PoFA is completely silent on 'Registered Keeper'.

DCodd

pappa_golf wrote: »

a lot of companies might be trying to add those words , however they would get short change at an employment tribunal , if they took money for a non legal situation.

This is derailing the thread for the OP so I'll just say that a deduction from wages that the employee has agreed to by signing the relevant document is never unlawful. It's only unlawful if the deduction is for something that was not agreed to.

DCodd

Umkomaas wrote: »

They could have named the driver, but equally he is also the keeper on the day, so naming as keeper is a totally legitimate response. PoFA gives the keeper protection, while it provides nothing to the driver.

PoFA is completely silent on 'Registered Keeper'.

But companies won't do that or very few. I wouldn't be able to justify to my Board of Directors sending the paperwork back saying the employee was the keeper because the lease company would have named the company as the keeper and the cost of my time spent arguing that we were not the keeper plus the time contesting the ticket would out way the savings made by successfully appealing it.


The only way I can fight the charges for vehicles not owned by ourselves is to fight it on behalf of the named driver. Thankfully 99% of our vehicles are owned by the company.

bod1467

In my case I work for a multi-billion dollar global corporation ... they always try to have a "one size fits all" policy which means what you describe (the company appealing a ticket) would never happen.

DCodd

bod1467 wrote: »

In my case I work for a multi-billion dollar global corporation ... they always try to have a "one size fits all" policy which means what you describe (the company appealing a ticket) would never happen.

Yea we're just a medium sized company but every little helps. The deduction from wages bit still applies to you though (if you are UK based of course).

bod1467

DCodd wrote: »

The deduction from wages bit still applies to you though (if you are UK based of course).

Indeed it does - I'd already said that earlier.
Here's what my Car Policy says on the subject ...

Charges and Fines
Company drivers are responsible for paying all parking, speeding or other fines. Such fines must not be left
unpaid as this will result in the authorities taking action against the Company. The Company will deduct any
fines or penalties direct from the employee’s salary.

No mention of civil invoices.

Edna_Basher

POFA is a real dog’s dinner as far as identifying the “keeper” is concerned.

Within Paragraph 2 (1) of Schedule 4, POFA actually does define “registered keeper”, in relation to a registered vehicle as meaning the person in whose name the vehicle is registered;

This Paragraph goes on to define “keeper” as meaning the person by whom the vehicle is kept at the time the vehicle was parked, which in the case of a registered vehicle is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to be the registered keeper.

However, this Paragraph gives no definition of “hirer” – you have to dig into the detail of Paragraph 13 (6) (a) to work out what “hirer” means – i.e. the statement that “hire agreement” means an agreement which provides for a vehicle to be let to a person (“the hirer”).....

By transferring liability to your company, the lease company will have identified your company as the vehicle’s “hirer” rather than its keeper. A vehicle’s hirer may or may not be its keeper.

Transferring liability to the driver is relatively straightforward; as soon as the creditor knows both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver then the first condition of POFA (as detailed in Paragraph 5 of Schedule 4) ceases to apply.

Unfortunately, POFA contains no equivalent mechanism for a vehicle’s registered keeper and / or hirer to transfer liability to the actual keeper (e.g. an employee to whom a company vehicle is assigned and who may not necessarily have been the driver). The only feasible way is to provide evidence to prove that the registered keeper is not the keeper (as per POFA’s definition); however I think that this may be too much for PPCs, lease companies, employers, POPLA, the BPA etc. to comprehend.