We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
Signage - how could I possibly agree to T&Cs "by entering"- I can only read signs after entering!
PaulE1
Posts: 6 Forumite
Signage - how could I possibly agree to T&Cs "by entering"- I can only read signs after entering!
Hi all,
I'm a bit annoyed by the firm UK Parking Control Office Ltd. Having spent a genuine nearly 4 hours at a store at Stadium Retail Park in Wembley, I received a fine for being over the 90 minutes. Paying attention to the road (there were a lot of people walking and cars), I hadn't seen any restriction signs, but it turns out there are quite a few dotted around.
So my points:
1. You are able to enter their land without passing any signs or gantry that distinguishes the land as private from the public road. The address is:
Stadium Retail Park, Wembley Park Dr, Wembley HA9 8TS
2. Once you have already entered their land, they then notify you that by entering their land, you are in contract with them : "By entering or remaining on this land you agree to abide by all of the Terms and Conditions."
3. My argument or query here : under UK law, are they able to allow you to enter a site without fair warning prior to entering (e.g. clear signage at the actual entrance to the land, not within it) that you will be entering a contract with them. Surely it is not enforceable to impose a contract on someone to which they have had no opportunity to read and accept -regardless of whether or not a charge is issued, as you become bound at the moment of entry.
4. If you have to enter to read the terms and conditions, which it isn't reasonable to do whilst driving (small print, not safe!), then it would instead be reasonable to use a mechanism that allowed you to enter the site, have sufficient time to review the terms and then leave should you wish not to engage with the terms of their proposed contract? So phrasing such as "By entering and remaining on this land for more than 5 minutes, you agree to abide by all of the Terms and Conditions".
5. There is not sufficient, or indeed any opportunity to review the warning about ANPR cameras before you've been caught on them. Therefore, no reasonable opportunity to avoid it, should you so wish.
6. The open road into the parking, without entry gantry, and the fact it is lined by shops makes the space look like public land. Again, I would argue that clear signage prior to entry specifying that the land is private and that time restrictions or contract terms apply on entry.
Background info, and some other points:
It's a bit rough to get a parking notice when I was spending a lot in the store and needed to wait while they got an extensive list of parts for me, (they were short-staffed).
The store said I had to wait for the parking ticket, then send in my receipts in (which neatly cover the entire period I was in there) as an appeal, and then they would email if that was rejected. According to UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd, this mechanism isn't true.
We appealed, and it turned out they rejected it. However, my fault, I had spelt my reply email address wrong, so it bounced back to them. Instead of sending the rejection to the registered address UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd then sent a letter to the DVLA registered keepers address stating that no appeal or contact or payment had been made, therefore the higher price of £100 was due.
I called them, and on speaking to them, they acknowledged that the letter they had sent was not factually true, - and confirmed that they had received an appeal, that the appeal was rejected.
They cited that they did not send the appeal rejection to the DVLA registered address due to GDPR restrictions. This is obviously not true, GDPR isn't yet active, and even if their policy was to run their new GDPR rules, the letter they sent was factually incorrect. They knowingly waited following the bounce-back of the email until the price went back up to the £100. In my opinion, their letter should have said an appeal had been made by a driver that they subsequently rejected, which they could have done without detailing the private information.
However, "as a gesture of goodwill", they allowed a further 14 days to make a full and final payment of the reduced £60 fine.
Also, I tried to query certain aspects of their policy. They were either contradictory, unclear, refused to explain "I've spent too much time with you" was one response. The member of staff also muttered "!!!!!" down the phone when I was trying to clarify one part. Something she later said she didn't do, but I have a recording!
Which is another thing - they record calls, but don't notify you. I'm sure that's in breach too? I queried that and in my recording, I've got them acknowledging that, and their response was not to amend their notice at the start of the call - it was that I should take it up with an authority..! Not the response from a company handling private information - that I would expect! Where else is our information held.
I believe when GDPR comes in, they will have to destroy information that is held that is no longer required, so once a claim has concluded - e.g. registered keeper details, photographs of the driver (regardless of whether a charge is issued or not).
They also will need to notify us what information they have requested from the DVLA, how and where they are storing it, etc.
So, here are some contradicting bits of information they have presented me with:
* Letter: "Please be advised that if you were aware that you may overstay, our telephone number is displayed on the signage. You could have used this number to contact our offices for advice or spoken to the shop assistant, who may have requested that your VRM was added to the whitelist to prevent a notice being issued".
* Phone call: "The shop has no authority to stop a notice".
* Phone call to MD: "The shop has no authority"
* Phone call: "You should have told the shop and they could have white listed your vehicle".
* Phone call: "The store know the procedure and told you incorrectly."
* Phone call: "The whitelist is only for contractors, no one else."
* Phone call: "The whitelist is for contractors and people making large purchases on a hire purchase agreement".
* Phonecall: "Only the land-owner can add a vehicle to the whitelist".
As an addendum to their rejection above, there is no advice along those lines "contact our offices or speak to shop assistant if you need to overstay"..
Quite simply, for a simple operation, they seem really unclear on policy.
I tried to clarify the stages of increments on the charge, and what affected it, e.g. appealing upwards. They were unhelpful, kept citing they'd told be everything. How can I make a decision about appealing unless I know the parameters. e.g. dates that other charges will apply,
Anyway, aside from that aspect, retail will continue its steep decline if this sort of thing continues to happen at our point of access to the high-street. Genuine shoppers should not be penalised. It takes much less of my time to order online! As is the case with the store I visited - Maplin, they'll just lose out.
Regardless of the outcome, I promise to post back here what happens. But given the attitude of the Director and the staff, I feel somewhat duty bound to ensure people have a fair opportunity to access shops in an apparently public place, without fear of being penalised if they can genuinely prove they are conducting business on the site (and yes, there is nearly 4 hours of really interesting CCTV footage at the retail park and in store of me buying lots of things)...
Any advice welcome!
Cheers,
Paul.
Hi all,
I'm a bit annoyed by the firm UK Parking Control Office Ltd. Having spent a genuine nearly 4 hours at a store at Stadium Retail Park in Wembley, I received a fine for being over the 90 minutes. Paying attention to the road (there were a lot of people walking and cars), I hadn't seen any restriction signs, but it turns out there are quite a few dotted around.
So my points:
1. You are able to enter their land without passing any signs or gantry that distinguishes the land as private from the public road. The address is:
Stadium Retail Park, Wembley Park Dr, Wembley HA9 8TS
2. Once you have already entered their land, they then notify you that by entering their land, you are in contract with them : "By entering or remaining on this land you agree to abide by all of the Terms and Conditions."
3. My argument or query here : under UK law, are they able to allow you to enter a site without fair warning prior to entering (e.g. clear signage at the actual entrance to the land, not within it) that you will be entering a contract with them. Surely it is not enforceable to impose a contract on someone to which they have had no opportunity to read and accept -regardless of whether or not a charge is issued, as you become bound at the moment of entry.
4. If you have to enter to read the terms and conditions, which it isn't reasonable to do whilst driving (small print, not safe!), then it would instead be reasonable to use a mechanism that allowed you to enter the site, have sufficient time to review the terms and then leave should you wish not to engage with the terms of their proposed contract? So phrasing such as "By entering and remaining on this land for more than 5 minutes, you agree to abide by all of the Terms and Conditions".
5. There is not sufficient, or indeed any opportunity to review the warning about ANPR cameras before you've been caught on them. Therefore, no reasonable opportunity to avoid it, should you so wish.
6. The open road into the parking, without entry gantry, and the fact it is lined by shops makes the space look like public land. Again, I would argue that clear signage prior to entry specifying that the land is private and that time restrictions or contract terms apply on entry.
Background info, and some other points:
It's a bit rough to get a parking notice when I was spending a lot in the store and needed to wait while they got an extensive list of parts for me, (they were short-staffed).
The store said I had to wait for the parking ticket, then send in my receipts in (which neatly cover the entire period I was in there) as an appeal, and then they would email if that was rejected. According to UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd, this mechanism isn't true.
We appealed, and it turned out they rejected it. However, my fault, I had spelt my reply email address wrong, so it bounced back to them. Instead of sending the rejection to the registered address UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd then sent a letter to the DVLA registered keepers address stating that no appeal or contact or payment had been made, therefore the higher price of £100 was due.
I called them, and on speaking to them, they acknowledged that the letter they had sent was not factually true, - and confirmed that they had received an appeal, that the appeal was rejected.
They cited that they did not send the appeal rejection to the DVLA registered address due to GDPR restrictions. This is obviously not true, GDPR isn't yet active, and even if their policy was to run their new GDPR rules, the letter they sent was factually incorrect. They knowingly waited following the bounce-back of the email until the price went back up to the £100. In my opinion, their letter should have said an appeal had been made by a driver that they subsequently rejected, which they could have done without detailing the private information.
However, "as a gesture of goodwill", they allowed a further 14 days to make a full and final payment of the reduced £60 fine.
Also, I tried to query certain aspects of their policy. They were either contradictory, unclear, refused to explain "I've spent too much time with you" was one response. The member of staff also muttered "!!!!!" down the phone when I was trying to clarify one part. Something she later said she didn't do, but I have a recording!
Which is another thing - they record calls, but don't notify you. I'm sure that's in breach too? I queried that and in my recording, I've got them acknowledging that, and their response was not to amend their notice at the start of the call - it was that I should take it up with an authority..! Not the response from a company handling private information - that I would expect! Where else is our information held.
I believe when GDPR comes in, they will have to destroy information that is held that is no longer required, so once a claim has concluded - e.g. registered keeper details, photographs of the driver (regardless of whether a charge is issued or not).
They also will need to notify us what information they have requested from the DVLA, how and where they are storing it, etc.
So, here are some contradicting bits of information they have presented me with:
* Letter: "Please be advised that if you were aware that you may overstay, our telephone number is displayed on the signage. You could have used this number to contact our offices for advice or spoken to the shop assistant, who may have requested that your VRM was added to the whitelist to prevent a notice being issued".
* Phone call: "The shop has no authority to stop a notice".
* Phone call to MD: "The shop has no authority"
* Phone call: "You should have told the shop and they could have white listed your vehicle".
* Phone call: "The store know the procedure and told you incorrectly."
* Phone call: "The whitelist is only for contractors, no one else."
* Phone call: "The whitelist is for contractors and people making large purchases on a hire purchase agreement".
* Phonecall: "Only the land-owner can add a vehicle to the whitelist".
As an addendum to their rejection above, there is no advice along those lines "contact our offices or speak to shop assistant if you need to overstay"..
Quite simply, for a simple operation, they seem really unclear on policy.
I tried to clarify the stages of increments on the charge, and what affected it, e.g. appealing upwards. They were unhelpful, kept citing they'd told be everything. How can I make a decision about appealing unless I know the parameters. e.g. dates that other charges will apply,
Anyway, aside from that aspect, retail will continue its steep decline if this sort of thing continues to happen at our point of access to the high-street. Genuine shoppers should not be penalised. It takes much less of my time to order online! As is the case with the store I visited - Maplin, they'll just lose out.
Regardless of the outcome, I promise to post back here what happens. But given the attitude of the Director and the staff, I feel somewhat duty bound to ensure people have a fair opportunity to access shops in an apparently public place, without fear of being penalised if they can genuinely prove they are conducting business on the site (and yes, there is nearly 4 hours of really interesting CCTV footage at the retail park and in store of me buying lots of things)...
Any advice welcome!
Cheers,
Paul.
0
Comments
-
Unfortunately you appear to have done everything we tell people here not to do. You have given away the driver's identity, and 'phoned the PPC.
You need to correct the name of the PPC in your second paragraph.
It is not a fine.
You are now in ignore mode unless you get real court papers. The sticky thread for NEWBIES explains what to do if this happens.
You should also complain to your MP and Sir Greg Knight MP about this unregulated scam.I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.
All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
Signage - how could I possibly agree to T&Cs "by entering"- I can only read signs after entering!
That's why they must give you a grace period to digest the T's&C's and decide whether to stay or not.Having spent a genuine nearly 4 hours at a store at Stadium Retail Park in Wembley, I received an [STRIKE] fine[/STRIKE] invoice for being over the 90 minutes.
These days you have to have all your wits about you with parking, it's a nightmare and always look out for charges and timings on signs.
But stop phoning these muppets you will drop yourself in it, it will not help you at all, follow the advice on here to the letter.0 -
Only a bit annoyed?! We feel stronger than that and we've never had a PCN from them!I'm a bit annoyed by the firm UK Parking Control Office Ltd.
Nor from UKPPO either:Instead of sending the rejection to the registered address UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd then sent a letter to the DVLA registered keepers address stating that no appeal or contact or payment had been made,
What happened when you STOPPED POINTLESS PHONING THE PPC, and instead complained to the retail Store Managers? As the NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST thread tells you to do.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Firstly, thank you for your help and feedback. In terms of avoiding a penalty, that's not really my goal. It is more important to me that the consumer experience is appropriate to the situation.
Retail is dying (and parking is one of the reasons...) and these parking vultures that rely on technology that is provably unreliable will get their comeuppance once way or another - of that I'm sure. They've certainly set that as my goal. One way or another, I will absolutely cost them more than the £60 they will earn from me...
Ok, as an update from my end, as promised:
* The store requested that my parking ticket was refunded.
* The parking ticket company contacted the 'land owners'. They said that even though they acknowledge that I was a customer of a store for the entire period, they still want the ticket to stand.
* Given the fact they appear (in currently legal terms) to have partially the upper hand, and because my time is more important to me, as is my credit, we shall pay up in this case.
However, I will now make it my life objective to progressively challenge the principal of being able to enter a premises under a contract that had not been notified prior to entry, and to contact all of their clients. That specific aspect seems fundamentally flawed, especially given other consumer protections that are in place across other areas of retail. Can you imagine if a shop gave you a notice if you browsed too long without purchasing, and were able to legally uphold it?
* Sadly, I came across this website after I had gone through the above actions, hence 'newbie mistakes'. But if retail parks exist like this, they deserve to shut down.
Anyway, for your amusement, here is their response:
* I am amused by their 'Dear Sir/Madam' - they clearly know whom I am. I'm also amused by their 'Kind regards' which I certainly didn't feel is an accurate description of their feelings towards their 'contractual clients'.
* I shall be publishing the phone calls, and sending to the 'land owners' - all of whom they represent. And the retailers on those parks. I'm sure some of those brands have better brand control and customer experience requirements of their support chain.
* That brings this thread to a close. Perhaps a useful reference, or starting point for other actions. Thanks again for your help!
Their letter:
UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd
Department 309,
Great Northern House,
275 Deansgate,
Manchester
M3 4EL
Parking Charge Number: XXXXXX
Vehicle Registration Mark: XXXXXXX
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your communication regarding the Parking Charge Notice issued by us on 22.03.2018
Please be advised that after liaising with the landowner they have stated that, although they appreciate you were a customer of one of the businesses at the location, due to the length of the overstay, they do not want the notice to be rescinded
If you are unhappy with our decision, you are entitled to seek independent arbitration with the IAS.
Kind regards
Appeals Dept
UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd0 -
Don't pay!
Your "credit", (assuming you mean your credit status) cannot be affected unless you ignored a ccj against you for over a month.
Stick with it and this forum to fight them, not feed them by paying0 -
Firstly, thank you for your help and feedback. In terms of avoiding a penalty, that's not really my goal. It is more important to me that the consumer experience is appropriate to the situation.
Retail is dying (and parking is one of the reasons...) and these parking vultures that rely on technology that is provably unreliable will get their comeuppance once way or another - of that I'm sure. They've certainly set that as my goal. One way or another, I will absolutely cost them more than the £60 they will earn from me...
Ok, as an update from my end, as promised:
* The store requested that my parking ticket was refunded.
* The parking ticket company contacted the 'land owners'. They said that even though they acknowledge that I was a customer of a store for the entire period, they still want the ticket to stand.
* Given the fact they appear (in currently legal terms) to have partially the upper hand, and because my time is more important to me, as is my credit, we shall pay up in this case.
However, I will now make it my life objective to progressively challenge the principal of being able to enter a premises under a contract that had not been notified prior to entry, and to contact all of their clients. That specific aspect seems fundamentally flawed, especially given other consumer protections that are in place across other areas of retail. Can you imagine if a shop gave you a notice if you browsed too long without purchasing, and were able to legally uphold it?
* Sadly, I came across this website after I had gone through the above actions, hence 'newbie mistakes'. But if retail parks exist like this, they deserve to shut down.
Anyway, for your amusement, here is their response:
* I am amused by their 'Dear Sir/Madam' - they clearly know whom I am. I'm also amused by their 'Kind regards' which I certainly didn't feel is an accurate description of their feelings towards their 'contractual clients'.
* I shall be publishing the phone calls, and sending to the 'land owners' - all of whom they represent. And the retailers on those parks. I'm sure some of those brands have better brand control and customer experience requirements of their support chain.
* That brings this thread to a close. Perhaps a useful reference, or starting point for other actions. Thanks again for your help!
Their letter:
UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd
Department 309,
Great Northern House,
275 Deansgate,
Manchester
M3 4EL
Parking Charge Number: XXXXXX
Vehicle Registration Mark: XXXXXXX
Dear Sir/Madam,
Thank you for your communication regarding the Parking Charge Notice issued by us on 22.03.2018
Please be advised that after liaising with the landowner they have stated that, although they appreciate you were a customer of one of the businesses at the location, due to the length of the overstay, they do not want the notice to be rescinded
If you are unhappy with our decision, you are entitled to seek independent arbitration with the IAS.
Kind regards
Appeals Dept
UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd
It is not a penalty, it's a speculative invoice.
Is the bit in bold true? Did the retailer actually say they wanted the PCN to stand, or is that lies from an unregulated scammer?
Answers on a postcard please.
I don't understand your comment about your credit is important to you. A PCN does no such thing.
Losing in court, not paying, having a judgement against you, and not paying that will have an affect, but you are nowhere near that.
Did you check the BMPA motoring charity website to see how likely they are to do court?
If you want to pay, that's up to you, but remember that it is a scam, no different to the Microsoft/Windows and Nigerian Prince scams. Paying will allow the scammers to scam more people. It will never stop until people stop paying and start fighting back.
What did your MP and Sir Greg Knight MP when you complained to them?I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
Do all of the above that you are suggesting - apart from paying! UKPPO are not much of a legal threat; even if you were to be just their 14th (ever) court case (from >30,000 tickets issued in the past 3 years), where better to exact your revenge!
Just ignore the half a dozen or so debt collector letters arriving over the coming 6 months, then see if UKPPO feel they have sufficient a case, and have the resolve to pursue this further by issuing proceedings.
http://www.parkingappeals.info/companydata/UK_Parking_Patrol_Office.html
Judging by your impressive writing skills, you would have no problem in developing a defence to see them off in front of a judge - and there would be plenty of help from the forum in assisting you with writing it.Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street0 -
I suggest that as the letter is started "Dear Sir/Madam" it is in fact a template.
Do you really think that a company that uses a dodgy arsenal of paperwork, debt collectors, threats etc even bothered the land owner on your behalf to stop their cashflow?0 -
OP, it would be a shame if you gave up and paid. You clearly have a determination and your use of the English language - given the strength of your posts - should be enough with/without this forum's help - to put up a strong defence.0
-
Thanks so much for the kind words and offer of help. Sadly, my time is just too packed to proceed with faux debt collection agency, even though I would love to really dig in on this one.
Having looked at the ownership of the 'organisations' of which this company is a member of, they appear to be a firm of solicitors, who have links to other areas of parking (not confirmed in any detail).
I can see the justification for some parking control. The car park is next to the football stadium, and I'm sure people would park in there to watch a match, to the repeated detriment of the retailers. That said, the mechanism they should use to reasonably protect that space for use of the shoppers should not then penalise said shoppers, especially when they're spending a lot of money and it takes a while to complete the purchase!
I simply won't return to that retail park for any form of shopping. Admittedly, my visit on that occasion was the exception to my usual routine, but once burned, etc, etc..
Sadly I feel that it must be the retailers that pay rent to the land owners who must make a stand to change the system. Landowners (i would assume) probably get paid handsomely by these parking vultures in commission and in rent from the retailers. However, when all the retailers go out of business because of a terrible overall customer experience (out of their direct hands), the landowners will need to drop rents, enjoy long voids and watch as their inflated retail park valuations decrease.
One of the only ways to save retail is to make access easy. Parking restrictions = trade restrictions.
And to argue that we need these parking fees / time limits in place actually makes only one thing clear - that the people that grant planning permission to developers are doing so without clearly enforcing an infrastructure to support it.
A football stadium's parking should be free and substantial enough to allow every fan / attendee to park. The same goes for the retail parks. Anyone parking in the wrong place is making a clear statement that the infrastructure is insufficient. And to argue that restrictive parking pushes people onto public transport (another story) only serves to degrade moral as people fight over parking spaces and get tickets from parking vultures. It seems very convenient for the developers that land isn't wasted on sufficient parking, and very convenient for the planners that they are delivering an infrastructure that 'favours' public transport.
Given another 20 years, I really do wonder how many of these out of town retail parks will exist. Or indeed any retail. The government(s) need to invest in infrastructure, not degrade other options to bully us into using public transport.
For now, this is where my story will end. I have paid the vultures - the lower £60. They have absolutely no further recourse against me, which I like.
However, on the 25th May when GDPR comes in to force, I will dedicate some time to pursuing the company's processes and (if appropriate) challenge them on how and what data they hold on me. I am particularly interested in how well their ANPR software, which is run as a private enterprise, complies, given that it takes and stores my personal image and details of my property. Not just one image for their evidence, but multiple images as part of the software's operation. Plus their emails, notices, letters to landowners, etc. All of which I'll be entitled to see, without paying the current £10 Data Protection fee.
Also, for anyone interested, they record calls, but don't notify you that they do this. I'm thinking a well placed letter to the Information Commissioner. They acknowledged that they do this. Also, they refused to provide details of their Data Officer - given they run CCTV type systems, and deal with personal details - I'm sure the Information Commissioner will be interested if there are any breaches there too.
Perhaps even a few actual fines levied to them there...?
Of course, I'll find out more after the 25th.
Thanks again, keep up the great work.
Paul.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 349.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453K Spending & Discounts
- 242.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 619.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.4K Life & Family
- 255.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards