**Double dip PCN** - MET parking services at Leisure World McDonald's, Colchester

beamerguy

chester_mand wrote: »

I went to spoke to the manager just now and he asked whether i have appealed to MET as normally i would have to do that first.

Anyway he said he will have to check their CCTVS and make sure that i was at their premisses for the entire period, which i was and he will make an appeal on behalf of me. I asked him whether he could CC me in any emails that he is going to send and he said he can't as he can't give out the company's email address for some reason. But he said he will personally forward those on to me.

What do you think guys?

I doubt the manager has any clout to cancel

It is important that he confirms the CCTV footage that your car
was there all the time but he will not give you any sort of copy because of Data Protection.

Wonder why he thinks he cannot give out the company's email
address when it's in the public domain ???

Mcdonald's Restaurants Limited

Mr Paul Pomroy Chief Executive

Email paul.pomroy@uk.mcd.com

If the manager fails you, the CEO is the next step

chester_mand

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Not really, McDonalds contract with them. So they *can* operate there. No-one stops them.

Yes, without saying who was driving, but stating that the occupants of the car were in McDonalds and have complained to the Manager, who is contacting MET to cancel it.

IMHO, MET do cancel when McD's managers tell them to, but you need to send an appeal too, not saying who was driving, so not 'me, myself or I'.

Thanks for the advice Coupon-mad.

I did read the Newbie FAQ post you wrote, hence i went to speak to the manager and expressed my dissatisfaction of the ticket situation to him.

I will jump on the next step and submit my appeal to MET and see what the outcome is.

chester_mand

beamerguy wrote: »

I doubt the manager has any clout to cancel

It is important that he confirms the CCTV footage that your car
was there all the time but he will not give you any sort of copy because of Data Protection.

Wonder why he thinks he cannot give out the company's email
address when it's in the public domain ???

Mcdonald's Restaurants Limited

Mr Paul Pomroy Chief Executive

Email paul.pomroy@uk.mcd.com

If the manager fails you, the CEO is the next step

I told my missus the exact same thing. It is a public domain where everyone could get their hands on it and he told me that he couldn't give their email out and i was thinking :huh::huh::huh:

Coupon-mad

DoaM wrote: »

A bit harsh, especially given C-m herself thanked that very post.

Only because I thank everyone - I just removed the thanks, Nigel is right.

chester_mand

Is the below template the right one to use?

Also, do i have to mention that i have spoken to the store manager (including his name) in this appeal?

One last question, am i right by filling the signature as how the letter was addressed to?
Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No. ....................

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car.

I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in!MET Parking Services.!Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 and offer me a POPLA code, or cancel the charge.

I attach a copy of the driver’s bank transactions that day as ‘they’ were a genuine customer.

Should you obtain the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause, please take this as formal notice that I reserve the right to sue your company and the landowner/principal, for a sum not less than £250 for any Data Protection Act breach. Your aggressive business practice and unwarranted threat of court for the ordinary matter of a driver using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me.!!

I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

patman99

Nigel is wrong. I do have a qualification in English Contract Law.

One such case we studied was very similar to the way PPCs work. The one thing that stood out was that someone acting on behalf of a landowner only has the legal right to negotiate terms of a contract with a land user.
They then have to hand over to the land owner to sign and enact the contract.

It is much the same as buying a house in that your solicitor can negotiate all the legal stuff, but they cannot sign the contract to complete the deal on your behalf.

Anyway op, no where in my post did it say they could not operate, only that their hands are tied when attempting to extract cash from you due to a small legal technicality.

Btw, it would be worthwhile writing to the planning department pointing out a clear breach of the Town and Country (advertising) Planning Act.
If enough people do this, then the planners will be forced to act.

Coupon-mad

I do have a qualification in English Contract Law.

Pre 'Beavis case' then.

someone acting on behalf of a landowner only has the legal right to negotiate terms of a contract with a land user.
They then have to hand over to the land owner to sign and enact the contract.

Can you explain how ParkingEye Ltd sued Barry Beavis?

chester_mand

So can I use the template above and fill in the signature as how the letter was addressed to?

Should I mention that I have spoken to the store manager and he aggreed to submit an appeal?

I have changed the ParkingEye LTD v Beavis. Is that that correct?

nigelbb

patman99 wrote: »

Nigel is wrong. I do have a qualification in English Contract Law.

Just because you have a qualification doesn't mean that your advice is not bollox.

patman99 wrote: »

One such case we studied was very similar to the way PPCs work.

Similar to the way PPCs work but not the same.

Here is an extract from the press release from the Supreme Court discussing their verdict in the case or parking Eye vs Beavis which is the definitive case in private parking law.

ParkingEye v Beavis
The court dismisses the appeal by a majority of six to one, and declares that the charge does not contravene the penalty rule, or the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

Mr Beavis had a contractual licence to park in the car park on the terms of the notice posted at the entrance, including the two hour limit. The £85 was a charge for contravening the terms of the contractual licence. This is a common scheme, subject to indirect regulation by statute and the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice. The charge had two main objects: (i) the management of the efficient use of parking space in the interests of the retail outlets and their users by deterring long-stay or commuter traffic, and (ii) the generation of income in order to run the scheme [94-98].

Unlike in Cavendish v El Makdessi, the penalty rule is engaged. However, the £85 charge is not a penalty. Both ParkingEye and the landowners had a legitimate interest in charging overstaying motorists, which extended beyond the recovery of any loss. The interest of the landowners was the provision and efficient management of customer parking for the retail outlets. The interest of ParkingEye was in income from the charge, which met the running costs of a legitimate scheme plus a profit margin [99]. Further, the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable, having regard to practice around the United Kingdom, and taking into account the use of this particular car park and the clear wording of the notices [100-101].

Here is a link to the full judgment https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-judgment.pdf

chester_mand

Coupon-mad is the below template the right one to use?

Also, do i have to mention that i have spoken to the store manager (including his name) in this appeal?

One last question, am i right by filling the signature as how the letter was addressed to?
Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No. ....................

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car.

I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in!MET Parking Services.!Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 and offer me a POPLA code, or cancel the charge.

I attach a copy of the driver’s bank transactions that day as ‘they’ were a genuine customer.

Should you obtain the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause, please take this as formal notice that I reserve the right to sue your company and the landowner/principal, for a sum not less than £250 for any Data Protection Act breach. Your aggressive business practice and unwarranted threat of court for the ordinary matter of a driver using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me.!!

I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,