Hire company paid private PCN against their own terms and conditions (ARVAL again!)

Umkomaas

Can't you cancel the direct debit instruction with your bank?

DJBenson

Probably, whether I'd want to do that is different as my agreement does specifically mention payment by Direct Debit and penalties (in the form of interest) if charges go unpaid.

If needed, I will simply reclaim the disputed amount (repeatedly if necessary).

However, bit of a breakthrough, I received an email from the CEO this morning so I'll sit tight and see what materialises there.

DJBenson

Boilerplate response received from the BVRLA advising they have written to ARVAL and will respond within 30 days.

Computersaysno

I know someone who took a hireco to court for this very reason...and ended up £200+ better off for their trouble!!!


In the words of Corporal Jones...they don't like it up 'em!!!

DJBenson

Just a question whilst I await responses from the BVRLA, FOS and the CEO of ARVAL;

I've been reading a lot of cases here and over on Pepipoo and there seems to be some requirement for planning consent to install and operate ANPR cameras (or more specifically the signage associated with that operation) - have I understood that right and if so does no application where signage is displayed mean an invalid operation?

Umkomaas

It's advertising consent for signage, planning consent for ANPR cameras, but that's very much a generalisation and each will be subject to its own rules like the size of the signage and to what structure the cameras are attached to, among others I would imagine.

The local authority would be responsible for providing consent and enforcing any contravention.

In what context are you enquiring?

DJBenson

I was just wondering - a quick look on the local planning application site shows nothing for that car park - I've emailed the council asking for them to double-check for me. Another line of enquiry I guess.

The camera for this site is mounted on a pole facing the gate adjacent to the road along which this car park runs. It's not a large car park (less than 100 cars I'd say).

Just got to wait now, the BVRLA, FOS and the CEO have all now acknowledged my complaint so I just have to hope one of them comes good.

DJBenson

I've also received the holding response from the FOS today so they are also looking into the matter.

DJBenson

Received a response from the local planning enforcement officer in relation to the car park, he tells me that despite the car park having been operating for years, he had "not identified an application for approval of the APNR operation" and did "not have any record relating to the camera or other related items".

Separating action against ARVAL from this, is this worth pursuing if only to entertain myself? Would love to be the one to prove CEL are indeed scam artists.

Fruitcake

DJBenson wrote: »

Received a response from the local planning enforcement officer in relation to the car park, he tells me that despite the car park having been operating for years, he had "not identified an application for approval of the APNR operation" and did "not have any record relating to the camera or other related items".

Separating action against ARVAL from this, is this worth pursuing if only to entertain myself? Would love to be the one to prove CEL are indeed scam artists.

Not having advertising consent for signs over a certain size is a criminal offence. Trading Standards should be informed, as well as local press that a parking company is breaking the law. Since UK law prohibits anyone from profiting from crime, any monies made by the parking scammers should be refunded to the victims.

The local council should also be required to investigate and instruct criminal proceedings should the allegations be confirmed, and the scammers not allowed to operate until advertising consent been approved. This application can of course be contested by local residents.