CPM Parking fine on leased car

outraged_

This is the email I received form the pub today, after I sent one requesting again a cancellation of the charge and, if not, citing that they cannot discuss this with CPM


Is it worth the hassle? I'm thinking I should just pay this and the admin fee...


Further to your email and our correspondence, unfortunately we are unable to cancel your outstanding penalty charge.

Our licence includes "car park enforcement" which we feel we are stipulating with sufficient signage, including the one you parked in front of (see attached) to visit the shop next door with a box, despite claiming you were meeting a friend then returning later which has never became evident, nor is it relevant, a claim which is now seemingly ignored in your plea. Because of this we can not have the charge cancelled as this breaks our licence regulations. The car park being empty at the time does not mean you make the judgement on whether to stop there or not as it is private property for use of customers only at our descretion. Being empty at the time this would have enabled you to have seen any number of the seven signs on the walls plus two on the entrance. While no pedestrians were endangered this time this is hindsight, we simply cannot allow everyone to just continue entering until it does, therefore this is to act as a deterent so we are not liable for any injury, especially to non customers.

As you have no doubt seen online, we have had many instances of non customers parking here and being fined. While you deem this to be unfair (although the responsibility is ultimately with yourself) we are doing our job in order to keep our licence intact. We have faced a warning from the police in the past about non customer related parking with the possible result being that of our licence being rescinded. Personally, I would find this to be most unfair based on many unnecessary cases, including this one. This is not the reputation we would ideally like but then we would ideally like only customers parking in our car park and with the many signs visible there really is no excuse. In order for this to be achieved we feel a car park management company sufficient. As far as we are aware CPM are accredited to aquire the necessary information to legitimately enforce penaties for private car parks.
[FONT=&quot]
The following I must quote :

"You cannot breach data protection and privacy laws so if you will not simply cancel it for my company (which I know 100% you can do) you MUST make sure our conversations are never discussed with the litigious ex-clampers you've put there to harass customers."

"Furthermore, a quick online search on your pub evidences that we're not the only one having suffered this entirely unfair charge. Is it really the reputation you want for your business?"

We feel that all of these quotes amount to that of blackmail, quite simply, you are attempting to force us in cancelling a penalty or else.... something that cannot be done so we will forward this to our licence officer who we ARE allowed to discuss with. Our suggestion is that you contact them directly referring back to our letter in the previous email. If they agree to have the charge cancelled we will be more than willing to have this done, as all cancelling requests go through them first there is not a lot we can do in the meantime.[/FONT]

Quentin

A retailer refusal to help doesn't mean that you will end up being ordered to pay!

Coupon-mad

No-one pays UKCPM just because a retailer/trader on site won't cancel the scam! Why not escalate the complain to the Licence Officer, as they have mentioned?

The person replying sounds aggressive. I am sure the Licence Officer will be very unhappy with the Trip Advisor reputation building up, almost all due to this parking scam aimed at customers (it is not aimed at none customers, that is baloney).

outraged_

Coupon-mad wrote: »

No-one pays UKCPM just because a retailer/trader on site won't cancel the scam! Why not escalate the complain to the Licence Officer, as they have mentioned?

The person replying sounds aggressive. I am sure the Licence Officer will be very unhappy with the Trip Advisor reputation building up, almost all due to this parking scam aimed at customers (it is not aimed at none customers, that is baloney).

I tried to ring the Licensing officer yesterday and they didn't answer the phone. Maybe I should try again.


The woman was super aggressive yes, and replied to the reviews in an aggressive manner too.



Would yo suggest emailing the Licensing officer?


UKCPM's letter was really a joke, they didn't put an address of the alleged offense at all. There's no way of identifying where it was, I only knew from the photo, but really I could easily not have known and the reason given was only "unauthorised pariking".

After reading all the posts on here they appear to use that reason in every single case. Surely that can't be right?

On top of that the deadline to pursue keeper's liability I believe was also passed.as the petter on my note was the 12/09, I received only on the 17/09, the incident occurred on 07/08 and Arval passed my details to them on 21/08?

It really is just the fear of the hassle and expense of taking this to court... What If I lose and have to pay their expenses, court fees etc?

outraged_

My last email to the retailer


[FONT=&quot]Of course It’s not blackmail. I’m not that sort of person and I wouldn’t do that. My apologies if it seemed that way.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The reviews online are there from way before this incident, so they are nothing to do with me.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]All I was trying to do was highlight the dubious conduct of the company you chose to manage your car park. They really are cowboys, they are not members of any credible entity so really this is making the lives of people being treated unfairly very difficult. Even their own website is full of typing errors![/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]With regard to the licensing officer, I rang him and he was charming, but politely refused to speak to me about the matter as it is not a crime but rather a civil dispute. He confirmed exactly what I said in my email to you, they have no involvement in the manner in which you enforce your car park rules and he certainly cannot cancel this “ticket”. You are not forced to use this company, you can do the same or even a better job by just having the CCTV and checking it yourself, for example. Or by installing the barriers, which will certainly be the most effective way of dealing with the issue. The charge doesn’t need to be this extortionate either if the idea is to act as a deterrent. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When I mention the fact that there’s no POPLA stage was to highlight the fact that this company is in business purely to make money, they are not treating people fairly.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]We will take all of this to court and will most certainly win due to the inconsistencies in their letter to us.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I was just writing in the hope that you will save us from the hassle, but I do apologise for the inconvenience caused and wish you all the best for the future.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Again, this is a confidential matter and I do not authorise you to disclose our communication to UKCPM to assist them in the event of court proceedings.[/FONT]

outraged_

A question: obviously they are able to dsiclose CCTV in court. Would that not suffice in proving who the driver was?

Coupon-mad

outraged_ wrote: »

A question: obviously they are able to disclose CCTV in court. Would that not suffice in proving who the driver was?

UKCPM don't use CCTV.

If the pub do, then they can't share images with UKCPM for purposes other than the CCTV is there for. If the pub has CCTV it will be for security, and not for allowing a third party to scam people out of parking charges not owed.

Would you suggest emailing the Licensing officer?

Yes.

Mainly to complain about the aggressive nature of the person at the pub, and about the reputation of the place being dragged down by an ex-clamper with no valid/worthwhile independent appeals process; a notorious bunch of aggressors who sue people instead.

On top of that the deadline to pursue keeper's liability I believe was also passed.as the petter on my note was the 12/09, I received only on the 17/09, the incident occurred on 07/08 and Arval passed my details to them on 21/08?

If you read the POFA Schedule 4 paras 13 and 14, you will find that the relevant period is 21 days from when they got the lessee/hirer name, to get a NTH to a victim, and it must be accompanied by 3 pieces of paper too. Even the 21 day deadline wasn't met in your case. You know what the 3 pieces of paper are, from your reading of Sch4, and I bet they were not enclosed (please don't ask what they are, it's important that Newbies read the POFA relevant paragraphs and understand why the PPC can't hold them liable in law).

It really is just the fear of the hassle and expense of taking this to court...

Hassle in defending, yes, it certainly takes some work to fight these and win like we do (but you wouldn't be 'taking it to court' - the PPC would...).

.What If I lose and have to pay their expenses, court fees etc?

What have you seen from the odd case lost over the past year or so, on this forum? I know there are hardly any here (literally a handful reported lost at a hearing), so I will make it easy for you.

People who lose pay about £150 - £175 tops. There is no valid sum of £60 that a PPC can just bolt on to a £100 PCN. The extra that people who lose have to pay, that takes it up to £150 or so, is merely a small court fee and interest. No huge costs/no solicitors fees.

No CCJ, as long as a losing defendant pays within 30 days of the Judge saying to pay. It is wiped - there is absolutely no effect on credit rating, even if lost. No risk at all, we would not encourage people to do something that puts them at risk, or that we would not do ourselves.

outraged_

Ok guys, I don’t know what to make of this. So I sent a letter as my company, with no mention to any driver.

Today I received a letter from CPM saying “the notice to keeper clearly states “if you were not the driver of the vehicle, you may notify us (in writing using the form attached) of the name of the driver AND pass this Botice to the driver”. Therefore, if you wish to transfer liability to the driver of the vehicle at the time of the contravention please use the form attached to the Notice.

If you wish to appeal as the registered keeper and accept liability, please write to us stating your grounds for appeal.

Please note. The PCN will not be placed on hold...

Anyway I won’t bore you with all their waffle, but I just don’t understand how they think they can just pursue a company as a driver ? And they totally ignored the fact that my letter was in fact an appeal on the fact their PCN was invalid.

What should I do now?

KeithP

outraged_ wrote: »

...I just don’t understand how they think they can just pursue a company as a driver ?

If they don't know the driver's name and address then, provided they meet certain conditions, they can pursue the keeper - i.e. the company.

That does not mean that the company magically becomes the driver, it just means that the driver's liability has been transferred to the keeper.

If you don't understand that then you need to re-read post #1 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread where it is explained in greater detail.

Coupon-mad

They can't, in this case, as Arval named the company as 'hirer' and then the PPC missed the 21 day deadline.

I'd sit tight, ignore them and wait for the Letter before Claim, if you are authorised to put the company at 'risk' of court...are you? Is it your own firm?