Do they have the driver bang to rights ?

lgoochy

Driver of vehicle enters the Media City Manchester carpark at 7:40 PM approx run by excel parking
Drives to pay and display and notices that it is out of service (has a photo to prove this)
Then goes to the other machine and wishes to pay for for 2 hours of parking. Follows all of the instructions and starts off with payment of £ 2.50 and then to add more time press + button. Duly does this but then the charge comes up £ 43.00. Clealry something amiss.


Driver comes away with a ticket for only 1 hour of parking starting at 19:46 but the ticket say expiry @ 20:00 hours. The car park closes at 20:00 and says overnight parking between 20:00 and 8AM is £ 12:00 but the machine gave no opportunity to pay this fee.

Driver returns and puts the only ticket they could pay for (unless it was £ 43.00) on the dash.

A red PCN is then issued at 21:04 stating that this is not a PCN but to log onto myparkingcharge.co.uk

The keeper of the car is a company (employer) so at the moment the driver has done nothing and will wait to see if excel get the keeper details and issue a PCN to them.


The driver feels that excel have them bang to rights however the machine did not give the opportunity for the driver to pay for the required after hours fee which they would have gladly done. However driver has no way of proving this unless they drive down again in the evening and take a video.


Whats peoples opinions on this ? Should the driver just pay the £ 60 and get on with their life or contest this in full. The driver has the added complication of being a fleet car and their employer will just want them to pay the fine.


I have spent a couple of hours reading newbie threads and cannot find the same circumstances. For clarity the driver did not have a mobile phone with then and took photos with an Ipod touch so they could not inform them of their machine not playing ball.

Fruitcake

The scammers do not have the driver bang to rights. There was obviously a problem with more than one payment machine which caused a frustration of contract.

The (day to day) Keeper needs to appeal this now using the hire/lease company template written by Edna Basher from the NEWBIES thread to ensure it is not picked up by their employer who may stupidly decide to pay it on their behalf or name them as driver.

The circumstances are exactly the same as everyone else's and the NEWBIES tells you this.

You should also complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

beamerguy

A red PCN is then issued at 21:04 stating that this is not a PCN
but to log onto myparkingcharge.co.uk

We have seen this before from Excel. There can only be one definition
of this ..... PARKING CHARGE NOTICE

They are saying it's NOT ??? but their site wants you to pay ?

MISLEADING AND AGGRESSIVE COMMERCIAL PRACTICES
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/721872/misleading-aggressive-commercial-practices-guidance.pdf

Part 1: Liability for misleading and aggressive
practices
The 2008 Regulations make misleading actions unlawful
(see regulation 5). An action by a trader is misleading if it
contains false information or if it is likely to mislead
the average consumer in its overall presentation.

Excel knowingly are misleading you

lgoochy

thanks for the reply. Very interesting indeed.

lgoochy

Fruitcake

The driver has advised their employer that this is a potential scam and not to get involved. The driver has asked for all correspondance to be sent to the driver with no action from the company.
I have read up on the Edna Basher letters. Does the driver send a drafted letter via the appeals section of the myparkingcharge website now, or wait until Excel contact the DVLA for the registered keeper details and then begin the process.
Any advice appreciated :-)

:beer:

KeithP

The driver should do none of those things.

As Fruitcake says, it is the (day to day) Keeper that needs to appeal this now.

Re-read the rest of his post for details.

The Driver's identity should never be revealed.

lgoochy

KeithP.

Understood, but does the keeper appeal now or wait until they get in touch with them after they get the keeper details from DVLA ?

TIA

Coupon-mad

This is the same as the Europcar thread - same advice.

Fruitcake

lgoochy wrote: »

KeithP.

Understood, but does the keeper appeal now or wait until they get in touch with them after they get the keeper details from DVLA ?

TIA

Which part of the word "now" from my post and from KeithP's post did you not understand? Do you understand the difference between The Driver, The (day to day) Keeper, The Owner, and The Registered Keeper? These are fundamental principles when appealing a hire/lease/company vehicle as they are four separate entities.
One has no protection. One has the protection of the POFA 2012. Two can drop one or both of the others in the doo-doo if they get involved because The (day to day) Keeper has not acted quickly enough to prevent the other two from receiving anything.

One of them should never be identified, only one of them should appeal, two of them should not be involved which is why you have been given very specific advice about this.

lgoochy

Fruitcake
You hit the nail on the head. I don't understand.I am cool with the driver but distinguishin the day to day keeper, owner and registered keep is grey to me.

So here is my stab at it
Day to day keeper (the employee who is down as the person the the company gives the car to)
The owner and registered keeper to me are the same thing (the company who owns the car and has their details on the V5)


The added complication is that the employer who owns the car subcontract the management of the fleet to a third party.

So the best action is to use the appeals process on the myparking website and act as the company (owner) and use the Enda Basher letter template before they request the details from the DVLA.

Thanks for the clarity. It is hugely appreciated.

lgoochy

Here is what I am thinking of sending via the myparkingcharge website as an appeal.
Any further advice or information I should put in here would be greatly taken.


I am keeper of the above vehicle

The keeper was issued with a parking ticket on 1/12/2018 but I believe it was unfairly issued. We decline the company’s invitation to name the driver, which is not required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. I will not be paying the demand for payment for the following reasons as stated below and we will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner and to the local MP.


• The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The amount charged is not based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to the company or the landowner.

In this case, the £ 60.00 charge being requested for far exceeds the cost to the landowner of £ 12.00 for the overnight parking fee. We therefore feel the amount you have asked for is excessive and request the actual grace period agreed by the landowner. If you fail to give evidence of the actual grace period that applies at this site or suggest that only one period applies, this will be disregarded as an attempt to mislead.

• Malfunction of the ticket machines at the site.
The driver endeavored to pay at the nearest ticketing machine but this was out of order as shown by the photo below taken on an Ipod. It is not the driver’s responsibility to inform you of the out of order machine and the company is also discriminatory assuming that everybody has a mobile telephone, which the driver did not have.
Another machine was tried but only allowed the driver to pay a fee of £ 2.50 for 1 hour of parking or £ 43.00 ! At no point did it allow the payment of the overnight parking fee of £ 12.00 which the driver would have duly paid if it allowed them to do so. As such the other and sole other machine in this car park is not set up to take the correct payment

Misleading and Aggressive Commercial Practices.
You have issued a Red document and clearly stated that this is not a Parking Charge Notice on the front. However you then invite the driver to pay a charge within the next 5 days on myparkingcharge. This is both misleading and aggressive as per The Guidance on the Consumer Protection Regulations 2014 Part 1.
“The 2008 Regulations make misleading actions unlawful (see regulation 5). An action by a trader is misleading if it contains false information or if it is likely to mislead the average consumer in its overall presentation.”
The way the notice is presented is devious to the extent that you have made it appear to the general public it is an official PCN, which it is not.