First parking 28 Jan

Liamcruddace

A few weeks ago I got a parking ticket at my university.
Annoyingly I had used the app and pressed pay but a second request came up asking me to confirm pay which I had missed.

After speaking to the university they let me know there was a first warning system in place, which I had never recieved. The university assured me if I appealed stating that I hadn't recieved a first warning it would be overruled

I appealed and they replied
"After reviewing the photographic evidence and also your appeal information; on this occasion I will be rejecting your appeal. It is the drivers responsibility to ensure they are clearly displaying a valid permit and/or pay & display ticket"

They sent this on the Friday and gave me till Sunday to reply at the reduced rate removing my ability to contact the university again. The message was a no reply email and they said I could no longer appeal and I would need to contact POPLA if I had a complaint

I contact the university on Monday and they were shocked and told me email first parking stating that this violated their contract agreement of a first warning and to email again and cc the university in. However, I can now see there is no way to contact, no complaints number or email, no reply to the email, no contact number. The first warning system only exists between first parking and the university, first parking have clearly rejected knowing full well that I have no way of winning as POPLA will go by the sign and Dont care about the unwritten agreement, and the only people who may care have intentionally made themselves uncountable. The university said they were willing to appear in email discussion, but this is not an option. But aren't willing to take some kind of action off their own back

As I appealed they now have my contact details. Do I just need to pay the now doubled fine? Is there a way around it. They have clearly broken their contract agreement knowing they will get away with it and I'm so annoyed

Thanks

Umkomaas

Get the university to confirm their wishes to you in writing.

Do you have a POPLA Code? Start reading the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #3 to learn how to draft a decent POPLA appeal.

Coupon-mad

You would have won at POPLA had you not admitted to driving (next time!) as I am pretty sure F1rst Parking forget NTKs when people follow our tactics and appeal as keeper on day 26. Never appeal saying who was driving.

Anyway, email the person at the Uni and ask for an email for F1rst (the Facilities manager must have one) and also ask them to confirm in the reply email, what they said to you about no warning 'violating the contract F1rst have with the Uni' so you can quote it to F1rst.

When you get the Uni's reply, forward THAT to F1rst and give them 7 days to cancel before you complain to the DVLA and BPA that they are obtaining data against the KADOE rules, because they should have put a warning note on the car and are operating outside of/in breach of their landowner agreement, conduct which in turn, is a breach of the BPA CoP.

The_Deep

Do I just need to pay the now doubled fine?

It is not a fine, it is an invoice for the damage they allege you inflicted upon them when you allegedly breached an alleged contract. We call it a scam. Pay them not one penny unless a judge so orders in court..

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this year..

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.

Liamcruddace

Thank you for the quick reply I can see that it states on the appeal reply

"as your vehicle is parked in contravention of the TaC of the car park, we are satisfied that the notice was issued correctly in accordance with the BaP CoP and are unable to waiver the charge"

Do you think this is false? Would I still be able to attempt what you stated

Coupon-mad

Wow, you read that as if it's not a template? How are people so easily led by the template replies of parking firms? Wise up, that means nothing at all!

Do as I said and get the Uni to email you to confirm what they said about F1rst being in breach of their contract, and to give you F1rst's email.

You need to become more confident and robust in dealing with scams!

Egbert_Nobacon

Why don't the University contact the scammers
They can order their sub contractor to cancel.
Job done

Umkomaas

Egbert_Nobacon wrote: »

Why don't the University contact the scammers
They can order their sub contractor to cancel.
Job done

The university said they were willing to appear in email discussion, but this is not an option. But aren't willing to take some kind of action off their own back

It doesn't look like they're prepared to do much.

Coupon-mad

''off their own back''

=

off their own BAT...it is a sporting phrase (think about it...clearly it's ''bat'').

Nothing personal. I hate that error and even pick colleagues up on that one. DETEST it!

Grammar pedant mode now off...

Liamcruddace

Ah that's reassuring. Yes I can now see its a generic response.

To be fair I do feel foolish, I have successfully dodged paying on two other occasions in two different locations/different companies. However I foolishly didn't think into it as the university assured me it would pass if I appealed stating the agreement. Annoying

The university aren't returning the calls now. I have sent a carefully worded email now so I have written confirmation. However, I fear they will refuse to disclose the contact details through gdpr.

I wonder if I could request the university email the company themselves and cc me in instead If they refuse?

The_Deep

Liamcruddace wrote: »

Thank you for the quick reply I can see that it states on the appeal reply

"as your vehicle is parked in contravention of the TaC of the car park, we are satisfied that the notice was issued correctly in accordance with the BaP CoP and are unable to waiver the charge"

Do you think this is false? Would I still be able to attempt what you stated

Is what false? What who stated?

This is a scam, every letter they send dissembles. The only thing that matters is what a judge says in court. Did you not read post number 4?