Premier Park PCN at Fitness First

cornilleou

Thanks, that's one option but I'm kinda keen to see tested this practise of harassing motorists who've made a genuine mistake...or do you think I'm being totally naive?

Redx

naive ? yes , because they are pursuing an invoice for an alleged debt

HARASSMENT is a pretty high bar to get over in a court of law , it needs to be proven , chasing an alleged debt may seem like harassment and causing stress, but its a legitimate practice

I know I would chase up an alleged debt if somebody owed me, same as landlords do about unpaid rent, which is what most civil courts are dealing with

cornilleou

Ah sorry, that's not quite what I meant. I meant should a motorist who has simply made a demonstrably genuine mistake (at no gain to them) still be treated as having broken any alleged contract by a PPC...

I would liken this to a case where someone has paid for a ticket but inadvertantly put the wrong registration on the ticket. Does the law support PPCs in such a case?

brewdog

wow! what a post-currently managed to write about 100 words for my court appearance due soon -you must have some solid stuff embedded in there-go to court and win- district judge Taylor against BW legal-for abuse of process -their letter next if you dont pay the £20

Redx

cornilleou wrote: »

Ah sorry, that's not quite what I meant. I meant should a motorist who has simply made a demonstrably genuine mistake (at no gain to them) still be treated as having broken any alleged contract by a PPC...

I would liken this to a case where someone has paid for a ticket but inadvertantly put the wrong registration on the ticket. Does the law support PPCs in such a case?

look up de minimis , the law does not deal in trfles

where a ticket has been paid the claimant has accepted the new terms , otherwise they have stolen your money put into the pay and display terminal , they accepted the contract by accepting the money

ask yourself this question, should the pdt accept a VRM not recorded as having entered the car park ?

does a cash machine accept the wrong pin number ?

when you sign in at the doctors , does the VDT present you with your details and ask if they are correct ?

when you login to your bank account , does it ensure your correct details have been put in prior to letting you view your account ? sometimes with 2 factor authentication ?

so why doesnt a car park do so ?

and what gives them the right to charge you for errors that didnt happen when they had a CEO on patrol in the car park ? They are expecting the public to be an expert with these machines and penalising them for not being experts , like supermarkets with these stupid self service checkouts to save them employing proper staff , but its the customers fault when it says unexpected item in bagging area, then waits for a harassed member of staff to come and scan their ID card and fix the problem


I dont remember signing up as an unpaid lackey for these businesses !!!


does you bank charge you for putting in an incorrect pin ? as a punishment ?

no, thought not

its not paying on a pay and display car park that judges dont like

if you have paid for parking , then the PPC should waive any issues once they have been brought to their attention

the BPA have clearly stated that minot keying errors should not raise a charge , that the PPC should check their systems for this before sending out a pcn, I am sure that the new CoP being drawn up by the MHCLG will address these issues


its an unregulated industry, with a business model set up for motorists to fail and then the MCOL system abused in order to increase profits for these companies, common sense went out of the window long ago, hence the 2019 Bill by Sir Greg Knight

Coupon-mad

I expect Premier Park will be sending in the debt collectors...

Not debt collector letters, not from PP. It will be a LBC then either a claim from BW Legal or PP Legal will follow (Premier Park's own pretend legal arm with (reportedly) no supervising solicitor.

cornilleou

Have now received a follow up response from my MP. Frustratingly, Premier Park seized upon my poorly chosen phrase of 'I also wish to state that at this stage the driver simply cannot remember whether they entered the registration incorrectly or completely forgot.' and pretty much reiterated their stance of by parking you agreed to the rules as laid out on our signs and there is nothing wrong with our terminals.

I only put that phrase in there to try and focus the discussion onto stopping the pedantic harassment of motorists who may have made a genuine mistake at no loss to them (as highlighted in the BPA code) but they have used it as an excuse to avoid the question.

Interestingly enough, a copy of a letter stating the 'agreed' process for genuine members to claim a reduction to £20 was attached! It wasn't dated nor did it show any company letterhead! Quite laughable really!!!

cornilleou

...and the charade continues....as predicted by Coupon-mad...received the LBC from PP Legal today. Amount outstanding has been put up to £170 with the threat that the amount outstanding will go up once the civil claim is issued....

Coupon-mad

The threat is intimidation - the sum remains at all times, at £100 (Beavis case paras 98 and 198, and the POFA 2012, says so).

cornilleou

...and the saga goes on. My case has been passed to BW Legal. I ignored their first letter and recently received their Letter of Claim. Interestingly enough the outstanding amount has gone down from £170 to £160!
Didn't particularly want to waste the time responding but noted forum advice that it looks better to do so, so I sent the below without any expectation of a response:- 

To whom it may concern

Parking Charge Notice: xxxxxxx

Vehicle Registration: xxxx xxx

Notice Issue Date: xx/xx/xxxx

Your Reference: xxxxxxxx

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated 26 February 2020.

 I dispute your Claim, as the keeper of the vehicle and deny any liability.

 Just in case you have not reviewed the history of this case:

 The driver is a member of the Solihull branch of Fitness First gym and having to their best endeavours entered the registration number at the terminal located within the gym is entitled to free parking whilst at the gym. Whilst not entering into any contract but in recognition of the landowners reasonable requirement to manage the use of their land, the car registration has been regularly registered by the driver on multiple previous occasions and the driver maintains that the registration was entered on this occasion. I have attempted to explain this to Premier Park and provided proof of attendance at Fitness First at the time in question but they continue to harass for payment even though they have confirmed using their own records that the registration number is regularly recorded at this gym. This kind of disingenuous behaviour, attempting to disadvantage genuine consumers, has previously been found under the scrutiny of the courts to be unacceptable and I am surprised you are repeating it.

To save all concerned the wasted time, acrimony and negative reputational impact, I strongly suggest that you contact Premier Park to arrange for this parking charge to be cancelled and notify me that this case is closed.

If you insist on pursuing this claim I will be claiming costs and I insist you respond with an explanation of the LEGAL basis for adding £60 "Debt Recovery Costs".

 

Formal note:

Should you later pursue this charge by way of litigation, note that service of any legal documents by email is expressly disallowed and you are not entitled to assume that the data in this dispute/appeal remains the current address for service in the future.

 Yours sincerely

xxxxxxxx