Another victim of MET Parking at Stansted

Umkomaas

The offence was 18 Dec and the NTK 7 dated 7 Feb.

If it was an ANPR or hand-held camera capture, the NtK is too late to hold the keeper liable. Needs to be received by day 15 following the parking event. By the way, it was never an 'offence'. Don't make this sound like it's something serious.

Does this all meant that it's too late for MET to take action?

Against the keeper, yes, but it won't stop them trying. This is a totally unregulated industry - anything goes. It uses pressure/harassment as a means of opening your wallet.

Given that my POPLA code expired, what do I do now?

Unless you can get a landowner cancellation, it's just a case of riding the initial storm of likely debt collector letters - about 6 month's worth, after which it should go quiet.

The PPC has up to 6 years to pursue you through the county court.

Wait for Court Proceedings?

It's really not going to happen.

http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/MET_Parking_Services.html

Gsmith45

Hello all. Quick update on our situation.

We got several "red" letters from MET Parking demanding payment etc. I wrote back to them and explained that they were delinquent in many areas and also that POPLA upheld the identical appeal from Nick Miller (elsewhere on this forum). I've also said that as it was obvious that their case had no merit that I would be charging them £1 a word to read and respond to future correspondence, and that by replying to me would constitute their acceptance of legally binding agreement.

Of course, they responded with more nonsense and I have now invoiced them for more than £1000 which I will take to the small claims court at some point! Has anyone else tried this?

In the mean time, letters have started to come in from Debt Recovery Plus. I wrote back to the first one asking them to desist. In an interesting response they have said the following:

As you are the registered keeper of the vehicle, I am assuming that it was being driven with your consent and that you will therefore know who the driver was.

If you do not provide details of the driver by the date shown above, we will continue to contact you for payment of the parking charge on the assumption that as the registered keeper you were also the driver of the vehicle (as established in Elliott v Loake [1982]).

I've looked up Elliott v Loake and it has zero relevance. I'm looking forward to seeing these guys in court if this is the defence they intend to mount. Should be fairly amusing to hear the judge rip this to shreds, and ask whether they have actually ready POFA2012! Has anyone else had this?

Umkomaas

If you're going to carry out your threat of issuing court proceedings against them, you'll need solid grounds on which to do that. If you're going to threaten court, you need to see it through, otherwise they are going to see this is bluster, and they'll ratchet up the hassle.

I've also said that as it was obvious that their case had no merit that I would be charging them £1 a word to read and respond to future correspondence, and that by replying to me would constitute their acceptance of legally binding agreement.

Have you checked this out with a lawyer? I don't think £1 a word will fly with any small claims court Judge.

Your alternative might be with a case against them for harassment, and the legal precedent is Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd. But the bar is set quite high, and you should read the judgment before firing off with both barrels.

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/46.html