The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (Misleading Ommissions)

tonyh1

I have tried to search forums for something similar, but this seems to be a new and undiscussed topic about the behaviour of a private parking company that I have had the misfortune of coming across. Earlier this year, I went to a car park and paid a £2.70 parking fee via the parking company's chosen web-based provider tap2park.

I subsequently received a PCN which I appealed because I believed it to be a genuine mistake by them and provided the sms text that they sent to me reminding me that the parking was about to expire (I had already left).

I admit to not knowing about this forum and the advice provided and so did everything wrong in that I accepted that I had been on the land and provided them with proof that I had paid. From the date of the first appeal to today no-one at I-Park, IPC or DCBL has responded to my appeals asking why they were pursuing a parking charge when I had evidently and obviously paid. However, earlier this month, DCBL did write to my MP and told him that there was no question that I had paid £2.70 but I had paid for an altogether different car park and therefore the parking charge notice was correctly issued. I have subsequently discovered that i inadvertently used locator code 1465 instead of 1456 on the tap2park website.

I understand that there may (also) be arguments to be made about minor miss-keying errors and how I-Park deal with them (as indeed how DCBL deal with them as Members of the BPA) and the relevance of this behaviour to the Equality Act 2010, but my thoughts now are that if my case is similar to probably thousands of others - are I-Park and other companies willfully breaching The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008? By refusing to provide material information that they knew about from the date of the first appeal, but which I could only have been aware of at the time that I paid the parking fee. All through this time, I have reasonably believed that I paid the parking fee and did so in good faith whilst I-Park has witheld materially important information despite my asking for it countless times. And of course, the parking charge and associated threats have increased with the passing of time.

Material Extracts From The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

(edited for brevity)

Section 2. Interpretation:

“materially distort the economic behaviour” means in relation to an average consumer, appreciably to impair the average consumer’s ability to make an informed decision thereby causing him to take a transactional decision that he would not have taken otherwise;

“transactional decision” means any decision taken by a consumer, whether it is to act or to refrain from acting, concerning—

(b) whether, how and on what terms to exercise a contractual right in relation to a product.

Section 3. Prohibition of unfair commercial practices:

Unfair commercial practices are prohibited.

(2) Paragraphs (3) and (4) set out the circumstances when a commercial practice is unfair.

(3) A commercial practice is unfair if—

(a)it contravenes the requirements of professional diligence; and

(b)it materially distorts or is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer with regard to the product

Section 6. Misleading omissions:

A commercial practice is a misleading omission if, in its factual context, taking account of the matters in paragraph (2)—

(a)the commercial practice omits material information

and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

In paragraph (1) “material information” means—

the information which the average consumer needs, according to the context, to take an informed transactional decision;

Section 10. Offences relating to unfair commercial practices

A trader is guilty of an offence if he engages in a commercial practice which is a misleading omission under regulation 6.

Coupon-mad

Short answer: yes I agree.  IANAL though.

This has been discussed before but not often. You will find threads if you search the forum for some keywords like:

CPUTRs misleading omission parking

or

CPUTRs misleading omission car park

tonyh1

What do you mean by "IANAL though?"

Thanks

Umkomaas

tonyh1 said:

What do you mean by "IANAL though?"

Thanks

Forum shorthand - I Am Not A Lawyer (nor me! 🤓)

UncleThomasCobley

tonyh1 said:

What do you mean by "IANAL though?"

Google is your friend.

tonyh1

So would anyone know if there is a viable defence to be made by somehow using The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations?

I am 8-9 months down the road since receiving the PCN and the last communication I received was from DCBL demanding £160 by way of a "Notice of intended legal action."

If I were to file a complaint against them - does anyone know where to do it? I tried contacting Trading Standards, but they seem to be using Citizens Advice as a buffer and instead of responding to my enquiry I got a page full of advice about what to do if you get PCN lol

Coupon-mad

There is no Trading Standards (to speak of) for consumers nowadays.  You will be banging your head against a brick wall because they take no interest.

Wait for your court claim and win in 2024. Easy.