MET Parking Services PCN - Urgent Advice Please

MrBear85

Hi, this is my first time posting on MSE.

Today I received in the post a PCN from MET Parking Services demanding £100 (£60 within 14 days) because my vehicle allegedly overstayed in a car park they operate.

The alleged offence took place last Wednesday 1st Feb, the driver parked in the car park of a Virgin Active gym which offered 4 hours free parking. The driver returned to the car 32 mins over the 4 hour limit, at 23:55. This was, however, long after the gym itself had closed at 22:00 and the vehicle was one of only 2 or 3 cars in this very large car park. I'm not sure if it's relevant but the driver had to leave via the entrance barrier (where the barriers seem to remain permanently raised) because the automated exit barrier would not raise.

Anyway, given the circumstances, I'm looking for some advice on what the keeper's course of action should be?

1. Appeal through official channels
2. Ignore the letter
3. Pay the discounted charge
4. Complain/appeal to Virgin Active

The keepers grievance is mainly with the disproportionately high value of the charge relative to the offence - especially considering the gym closed before the 4 hour period had ended.

What do you think the keeper's chances are?

Thanks in advance :-)

Half_way

Whos car park was it, I've yet to see Met parking operate a car park, just infest one, like parasites.

Coupon-mad

Anyway, given the circumstances, I'm looking for some advice on what my course of action should be?

Why the need for advice? It's in the NEWBIES sticky thread.

MrBear85

Hi,

Yes I took a look at the newbies thread but it seems to talk more about the different processes of appeal and irregularities to look out for. I'm looking for advice/chances of success considering that, allegedly, the vehicle was 32 mins over (no mitigating circumstances as such just late getting away from hockey training), the carpark was pretty well signposted if memory serves, and the letter they've sent does seem to follow the paragraph 9 guidelines mentioned in the BPA document linked in the newbie thread. The only contentious points I can see are that the driver did not leave the car park by the exit barriers because they would not open, and that it was very dark so all you can see of the car in the pictures are the headlights.

Thanks

Umkomaas

Mitigation doesn't work, period! What you've quoted are all mitigating circumstances.

Unless you get this killed off via appeal, following the routes described in the NEWBIES sticky, this will hang over you for 6 years, with hassle from debt collectors and a chance of court papers being served against you to recover the parking charge.

MET are BPA operators, opening up POPLA as the second stage appeal service where, with forum advice, you can beat this.

Redx

I fail to see what is "urgent" about it either

its no different than all the others we see once you remove the "story" and the response times are standard

any appeal is based on legal arguments which are the ones you read about in the NEWBIES sticky thread

the reason you didnt see all the points you raised is because none of them are relevant , it was all mitigation and you trying to make sense of "what happened" , whereas neither the PPC nor POPLA will look at or care about "what happened"

you follow the advice in that NEWBIES thread and stop making rookie newbie mistakes like you need to edit in post #1

example

THE DRIVER parked

THE DRIVER was playing hockey nearby

THE DRIVER had to leave by the inlet entrance barrier

THE DRIVER may have overstayed

anytime the following words are used an alternative should be sought

"ME , MYSELF and I"

you dont see MP`s using names in the houses of parliament, they skirt around it by using other means , "the right honourable member for INSERT LOCATION"

any significance about the claim not being proportional to the loss wne tout of the window about 16 months ago with the BEAVIS case at the Supreme Court in London, so clearly you missed that one , but those advising you have been doing so for several years, so I think we know who knows better here ; lol

now edit post#1 and follow the NEWBIES sticky thread advice for BPA members , forget your "story" as none of it is relevant to any appeal

these companies almost always fail the signage questions , becasue they rarely conform to the BPA CoP nor previous significant court cases

the PPC may well fail other tests like the landowner contract test etc too (no locus standii)

they may well fail the BOA CoP on grace periods for example

they may fail the POFA2012 test

more research is needed by you, once you have appealed, not naming the driver and never inferring that you know who the driver might be , especially not on a PUBLIC FORUM that parking companies can read free of charge

ps:- these 2 threads are what I would call "URGENT" , as they are ongoing court cases

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5597961

and

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5591251

MrBear85

Amended posts so far, as per your recommendation.

Obviously I am not an expert in this area and it is not something that I follow out of interest hence I have not heard of the BEAVIS case you refer to.

I plan to have a more detailed read of the newbie post over the weekend when I can give it the required time. I guess that, having given it an initial scan through, a lot of it was quite complex for the uninitiated and has a lot of branches off it depending on differing circumstances - this is why I described the specific circumstances in play here and was hoping to get a simple, top-line view of what the steps should be (and shouldn't be)?

I appreciate you taking the time to reply.

MrBear85

If I'm understanding correctly - the circumstances/story don't matter? The keeper just needs to look for something that the PPC has done wrong to undermine their claim for payment?

Thanks

Guys_Dad

MrBear85 wrote: »

If I'm understanding correctly - the circumstances/story don't matter? The keeper just needs to look for something that the PPC has done wrong to undermine their claim for payment?

Thanks

Not always. But the main point is "did I transgress the PPCs t&cs?" If so, then you need to point out where THEY transgressed the procedure.

Where the story can matter is with double-dips, cloned number plates, for example, where the driver did nothing wrong and the PPC was mistaken.

Your post says you did contravene their t&c so you need to establish why they failed to follow the "rules".

Coupon-mad

MrBear85 wrote: »

If I'm understanding correctly - the circumstances/story don't matter? The keeper just needs to look for something that the PPC has done wrong to undermine their claim for payment?

Yep, pretty much - hence the template appeal for this stage and POPLA, which do work. But you don't have to look for anything or spend any time on it, just send the blue writing template, it works - you will either get cancellation or a POPLA code and will not have given away the driver.

MrBear85

So, I managed to visit the car park last night and take some pictures (in similar conditions) of the signage both from the driver's seat and on foot. I now have renewed optimism about fighting this this.

Forum won't let me post the image links because I'm a newbie :-/

I'm going to draft my initial complaint to the PPC, can I post here for opinions? Also, should I simultaneously write a letter of complaint to the land owner, Virgin Active? The driver is not a member of the gym and did not visit the gym on the night in question.

Thanks all.