G24 PCN - Letter Received

ohjessydontbehasty

Hi All
So about a month ago, I received a letter from G24 stating that I had outstayed the free parking of 180 minutes by 17 minutes, at Sheffield Attercliffe Retail Park. This was around 7.30pm at night and we parked there as we couldn't get parked up at Cineworld. The shops shut at 8pm so it's not like I was preventing anyone else from getting parked up. I drove round today and there is a small sign at the entrance stating 180mins and a few other signs dotted around but they're far too small to read when driving - I wouldn't have even noticed them had I not received this letter.



I responded with a great letter from another user, Catharsis, who had the same experience at the same place and managed to get a cancellation letter, posted below:


"Dear G24 Ltd
As the registered keeper of the vehicle (registration FG10 OHA) concerned on the correspondence detailed above, I have received your parking invoice which I decline your invitation to pay.

I wish to invoke your appeals process, since all liability to your company is denied on the basis of the following:!!!8232;
In your correspondence, you allege that the driver of the vehicle "exceeded the maximum duration of stay at Meadowhall Retail Park, Attercliffe Common, Sheffield, S9 2YZ". You also state that "the terms and conditions of the car park are clearly displayed; in prominent places". Unfortunately, you have provided no evidence of these allegations. Two photographs of the vehicle were provided with your invoice, however neither image shows the vehicle definitively in the location you allege, nor do they show the clear display in prominent places of the terms and conditions. Furthermore, without a copy of the "terms and conditions" you claim exist, I am not satisfied the driver was in breach of them.!!!8232;
Your signage does not comply with your ATA Code of Practice and was not sufficiently prominent to create any contract;!!!8232;
You are not the landowner and do not have the standing to offer contracts nor to bring a claim for trespass;!!!8232;
The amount being claimed is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner;!!!8232;
At this point, I wish to give you the opportunity to cancel your invoice via issuance of a cancellation letter. If you do not wish to cancel this invoice, I will require notification via letter detailing your reasons for rejection of my offer to cancel, which must state:!!!8232;
The Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA) verification code to be used for any subsequent appeals on my part as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle in question;!!!8232;
The legal basis of your charge (i.e. breach, trespass or contractual fee) as your signage was not seen or accepted by the driver and your recent invoice failed to make the basis of the charge clear. As the registered keeper of the vehicle concerned, I cannot be expected to guess the nature of the allegation;!!!8232;
If alleging breach of contract, with your letter rejecting my offer of cancellation I require a breakdown of the liquidated damages suffered, and by whom, and when this calculation was determined and how this particular 'loss' arose. Please also provide details of how / why these losses are recompensed by payment of a fixed sum no matter whether the alleged contravention was trivial or more serious, and further how that can amount to a genuine pre-estimate of loss;!!!8232;
If alleging trespass, please enclose evidence of the perpetrator and proof of the liquidated damages alleged and the calculation of this sum;!!!8232;
If alleging 'contractual fee', I require that you now send me a VAT invoice by return and explain the daily rate for parking and service provided for the fee. Failure to provide this information and a VAT invoice following this request will be considered evidence that this was not in fact a genuine offer to park for a fee and is merely a penalty which is not recoverable in contract law (as found by Mr Recorder Gibson QC, on appeal at Luton County Court in the case of Civil Enforcement v McCafferty 3YK50188 (AP476) 21/2/2014).!!!8232;
A failure to provide either of the documents detailed above within 28 days from the date of this letter will be deemed an implied agreement on your part of my rejection of your invoice.

Any other contact by your company, other than the cancellation letter detailed above, but including your letter detailing your rejection of my offer to cancel, will be deemed as an appeal of my rejection of your invoice and subject to the terms and conditions outlined below:!!!8232;
All appeals are subject to a £54 Appeal Registration Fee (ARF) that, by submitting an appeal, you agree to pay. !!!8232;
The ARF has been determined utilising the court rate of £18 per hour for a three hour period to cover the processing and consideration of your appeal of my rejection of your invitation to pay, and any subsequent acceptance or rejection response which is required. !!!8232;
The ARF must be paid at the time the appeal is registered, by cheque !!!8232;
Any appeals received without the relevant ARF will not be considered, but the ARF will remain payable, along with an additional £18 administration charge for any and each subsequent communication or appeal received without payment. !!!8232;
In all cases, an individual invoice will be prepared and submitted for each subsequent appeal received. The administration charge per invoice has been determined utilising the court rate of £18 per hour for one-half hour in preparation of the invoice, plus £9 to cover postage costs by Royal Mail Special Delivery. Failure to pay this invoice may result in your case being transferred to a debt collection company or to further legal proceedings where additional costs could be incurred.!!!8232;
For the avoidance of doubt, any correspondence or contact received from yourselves (G24 Ltd.) or by agents acting on your behalf (including, but not limited to, debt collection companies) by either post or email will be considered as an appeal and thus subject to the ARF that, by submitting said appeal, you will have agreed to pay. Note that the ARF is non-refundable, regardless of the outcome of your appeal.

Additionally, I draw your attention to the following points of which I invite you to take formal notice:!!!8232;
Any obfuscation on your part, such as stating I have to name the driver; alleging I am too late or unable to appeal as keeper; or requiring more evidence when clearly I have already set out my full challenge for this stage, will be reported to the DVLA and to your respective ATA, as a sanctionable breach of your Code of Practice.!!!8232;
Your unsupported, unsolicited invoice and any further contact requesting payment (except the cancellation letter or detailed rejection letter as noted above) will constitute harassment. If you continue subsequent contact by your company and that of any agent authorised by your company to contact me on your behalf, will be deemed a 'serious and persistent unwarranted threat' (as found by Lord Justice Sedley in Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 46 10/02/2009) and I reserve the right to take the matter further. !!!8232;
This letter serves as your notification that I consider this to be harassment so any decision to send further letters (except as noted above) will reinforce the evidence of your persistent unwarranted threat and you may be required to justify your actions in court. !!!8232;
Notwithstanding the above, if you reject my appeal, and thus the subsequent offer to cancel the invoice, and insist upon taking the matter further I must inform you that I will seek to claim any costs from you which are not covered by the ARF and any subsequent administration fees, including my time at the court rate of £18 per hour. The expenses I may claim are not exhaustive but may include the cost of stamps, envelopes, travel expenses and legal fees as well as liquidated damages for distress arising from harassment. By continuing to pursue me you hereby accept liability to pay my costs when I prevail and you acknowledge and imply full understanding of the above."

I have since received the following:



"There are sufficient signs at the entrance to and in prominent locations throughout the carpark displaying the terms and conditions. You are welcome to revisit the site to view the signage, we advise you to adhere to the terms and conditions of parking when visit the site. Our signage complies with the IPC Approved Operator Scheme.
The photographs provide evidence of the parking event that occurred which show that the driver breached the terms and conditions of parking which were clearly displayed on the signage in the car park. If you wish to receive further documentation, these will be supplied once you make a proper request under the Data Protection Act. The face that such documentation might be used in any Court proceedings is not a legitimate way to circumvent the Data Protection Act.

The photographs were taken in a public place and therefore do not consititute personal date under the Data Protection Act. Apart from photographs, and the data which relates to those photos, we confirm that the only other date we hold for you is your name, address and registered number of the vehicle, all of which you already know. All data is securely stored by use and is destroyed in line with a suitable destruction schedule which takes into account industry and legal requirements.
We manage the car park on behalf of our client - and our client is not involved with the issue nor enforcement of our Notices to Keeper.
For the avoidance of doubt, in the absence of either: a) receiving payment of the parking charge, or b) being provided with the name and current address of the driver of the vehicle at the time the parking charge was made. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4) gives us authority to write to the registered keeper to obtain payment of the parking charge.

Our claim is not based on trespass, but on a breach of contract.

We have taken legal advice and we have been advised that not only can out parking charged be justified on the basis that they amount to a genuine pre-estimate of loss, but are likely to amount to "liquidated damages". This is because the Courts position is that where the parties to a contract agree to fix the amount which is to be paid by way of damages in the event of a breach of contract - which is the basis of the contract detailed on our signage - a sum stipulated in this way (particularly in circumstances where there is difficulty in calculating a precise estimation) is likelt to be classed as liquidated damages. Either way, our parking charges are fully enforceable and do not amount to a "penalty". You should also be aware that in accordance with the case of Robophone Facilities v Blank the onus of proving that an amount claimed is a penalty, rather than liquidated damages, is upon you (as the party against whom the parking charge is claimed).

We can confirm that it is not necessary for us to provide you with a breakdown of our parking charges at this time. That information is confidential, but is available and will be provided to the Court in the course of Court proceedings, if necessary, and if payment has not been made before then.

We respond as follows:

1. In relation to the suggestion that your parking charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss we confirm we have obtained legal advice in this regard and have been advised that not only can our parking charges be justified on the basis that they ar ein line with the Independent Parking Committee's guidelines, and that they amoutn to a genuine pre-estimate of loss, but they are likely to amount to liquidate damages (where the issue of pre-estimate of loss is not relevant). This is because the Courts position is that where the parties to a contract agree to fix the amount which is to be paid by way of damages in the event of a breach of contract - which is the basis of the the contract detailed on our signage - a sum stipulated in this way) particularly in circumstances where there is difficulty in calculating a precise estimation) is classed as liquidated damages. Either way, our parking charges are fully enforceable and no not amount to a "penalty". You should also be aware that in accordance with the case of Robophone Facilities v Blank the onus of proving that an amount claimed is a penalty, rather than liquidated damages, is upon you (as the party against whom the parking charge is claimed.)

3. You do not specify in which way you allege we not have authority to issue charges over the land where the car park is located. However, we can assure you that the parking management at the car park where you received a parking charge has been contracted to us.


You have stated that you were not the driver of the vehicle at the date and time, however you have failed to inform us who was."


It then just goes on to state the usual, you have 28 days to pay blah blah, your appeal has been rejected etc...


Any ideas on how / if I should respond?


Many thanks

fil_cad

Useful information, G24 don't do court so enjoy life

KeithP

Is that your full name in the letter you sent?
The one that cheques should be sent to?
Probably best to remove that.

Interesting that G24 still refer to their ATA as the Independent Parking Committee.

Coupon-mad

ohjessydontbehasty wrote: »

Any ideas on how / if I should respond?

Why are you wasting your time with G24, why respond? Pointless.

Complain to Sheffield Attercliffe Retail Park, just don't tell them you were in Cineworld! G24 cases are cancelled ALL THE TIME by retailers.

ohjessydontbehasty

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Why are you wasting your time with G24, why respond? Pointless.

Complain to Sheffield Attercliffe Retail Park, just don't tell them you were in Cineworld! G24 cases are cancelled ALL THE TIME by retailers.

Because I was there after the hours the retail park was open - who do you suggest in particular I should complain to? Do you have a contact number for the owners? I have no receipts as proof.

Coupon-mad

No, we have no contact numbers. Any retail park can be Googled for the agent/owner.