Stanmer Park Brighton, Private parking fine...

Seagull-Stripes

Thanks Jenni_D

I've just literally been looking at that.... :-)

I've also contacted the leasing broker who we initially got the lease through and they are requesting a copy of the terms and conditions.

SayNoToPCN

As above, you need that as it is only the T&C you signed at the start thaty matters to you
Unless they gave you notice of a change - updating a website is insufficient - then any changes post signing cannot bind you. 

Coupon-mad

I will cite the fact that transfer of liability was possible all along as per the BVRLA guidelines regardless of what OPS say and if they had done this I would have appealed and won. They will probably ask for evidence of this. Is this available anywhere??

Of course.  The law says so. ONLY a known driver could have been pursued and the appeal would have gone in from the hirer.  And the hirer wins, 100%.  Arval could also have won, 100%.

This is because neither the registered keeper, Arval, nor the hirer, was legally liable because the land is Council owned, therefore 'keeper liability' and the POFA 2012 was never in play.  This was a driver-only (non-POFA) PCN and Arval simply needed to tell OPS who hired the vehicle.  It was never Arval's to pay because they were not liable either (due to the lack of POFA in this case, Council land is under statutory control and exempt from the POFA):

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9155/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf

4. On what type of land does Schedule 4 apply? (PAGE 10 tells you)  

Seagull-Stripes

Hi guys.

After a super long wait for my lease agreement, please see attached 3 screen shots.

The first is a screenshot of the info they provide on their website re how they deal with fines.

The second is the wording highlighted regarding parking fines which then refers to Clause 10.1.

The third is clause 10.

So does it seem that the wording is a little ambiguous?

It states that ARVAL has no responsibility or liability for fines but according to the contract does that mean that they can pay them and then chase us for the money despite the fact that they are not responsible or liable for them. Or does that mean that they are not responsible or liable to pay them and will pass on the hirers details?

Also, ARVAL have stated to me in either a phone call or email (or maybe even both) that the reason they pay the fines is that they are liable for them but their contract states they are not. Does that sound a little contradictory?

Either I am missing something here or ARVAL are simply clueless and got their knickers in a serious twist. (Someone has mentioned previously here that ARVAL are absolutely useless and I'm starting to think the same).

Also FYI. I recently received an email from ARVAL with the outcome of my appeal which they forwarded onto OPS on my behalf. OPS came back saying they don't consider appeals after the charges have been paid. ARVAL then said that the charge still stands.

I emailed them back the following:

"I have made it very clear of why this should not be charged to us in several emails, the last one being sent on the morning of 26th April. Please read again if you haven't done so yet. I have briefly detailed again in the paragraph below.

I think the ball is now with ARVAL as to whether you decide to pursue us for this charge or drop it because the actions of ARVAL have clearly not followed the BVRLA guidelines in this case which ended up with ARVAL paying a charge (NOT FINE) which was unlawfully applied to the vehicle.
(As said in a previous email, Section 4 of the POFA 2012 does not cover council owned property. We were parked on council land. ARVAL paid a charge which no one was legally obliged/liable to pay and could NOT be pursued for in court. We would have appealed this and won but ARVAL lost us the right to appeal at first asking by just paying the charge despite being asked not to by email on several occasions before the charge was paid).

I would politely like to state that surely somebody from the ARVAL fines department should know about parking laws and the guidelines of which leasing companies and parking companies should abide by regarding private parking tickets? I mean, you have a whole department dedicated to this and you do carry out transfer of liability processes so you must know what you are doing and not just paying each fine as standard practice."

In an email previous to that I had stated that if they are to pursue us for the charge costs I will take it up with the BVRLA, Financial Ombudsman and if they take the money from our account I will go to a small claims court.

So as it stands, the charge (fine) is on hold and we haven't been charged yet but they are not giving me any indication of whether they will uphold my appeal to ARVAL or charge us.

I look forward to your responses.

Thanks in advance!!

Redx

We know that Arval are clueless , because it only says penalties , fines and offences and contraventions , nothing about private parking invoices

They should pass on hirer details according to POFA and the bvrla memorandum of understanding , which are several years old

If they want to include private parking charge invoices , they should say so , but have deprived the hirer of the appeal process , meaning that they think they can be judge and jury on the assumption that the driver is at fault and liable , regardless

And why have a pdf on private parking charges and not add it into the hire agreement

When the new CoP comes in next year , presumably they will have to update the hire contract wording to suit , especially if POFA became mandatory

Strange how KN contract hire can do what Arval cannot

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6263643/help-advice-please#latest

Seagull-Stripes

So......

ARVAL have not accepted they have done anything wrong and have deemed the charge payable by us and have closed the case!

It looks like I will be paying the charge via the next direct debit payment.

I challenged the fact that they could have transferred liability as per BVRLA guidelines and in their last email they stated that they couldn't transfer liability because OPS said they only accept a copy of lease agreement and a signed liability statement from the driver in order to transfer liability.

I did cite the Memorandum of Understanding agreed between their two trade bodies but it sounded on deaf ears.

I think OPS played a perfect game here. Being a BPA member, they must understand the processes agreed between the two trade bodies but knew that if they gambled and made the above (false) requirement in order to transfer liability, nine times out of ten the leasing company will pay the charge and pass it on to the driver. I believe that if ARVAL came back saying that that is incorrect and that all they needed was to provide basic contact details as per the MoU, OPS would have had to accept it and come after us for the money.

I have now put in a complaint with the BVRLA, Trading Standards and The Financial Ombudsman.

Let's see where this goes......

nicestrawb

is there not an argument here for you to issue ARVAL with a LBC if they are unlawfully (debatable) taking money from you?...

Umkomaas

Doesn't the BVRLA offer access to an ombudsman?

Seagull-Stripes

Umkomaas said:

Doesn't the BVRLA offer access to an ombudsman?

Not sure but they have their own complaints procedure which I have used.

ARVAL provided me a link to the Financial Ombudsman which I have also put a complaint in with.