Car lease company paid private parking company's parking charge & sent me the invoice to pay them.

Okell

MobileSaver said:

... I hinted at this in my direct reply to the OP - the BVRLA have stated in their written response that the OP can still appeal but we don't know if the OP has actually done that. We can only assume that this is correct and the BVRLA wouldn't be foolish enough to make such a thing up in writing...

Ok.  Thanks.  

I'm afraid your hint to the OP was far too subtle for me to pick up...   

I'm not sure I share your confidence in believing that the BVLRA would not be so foolish as to give wrong advice.  But I only say that from following the local authority PCNs on pepipoo where the prevailing view seems to be that lease companies have no clue as to how to go about transferring liability properly.  So far as I'm aware local authority PCNs can't be challenged once paid by the lease company, but perhaps private parking charges can be.  As I said, I'm no parking expert but none of this seems right (or fair) to me.

MobileSaver said:

... Of course if the OP's appeal is rejected on the basis that the charge has already been paid then that would change everything because as you rightly say that would make the recharge term unfair...

So your explicit suggestion to the OP would be to challenge or appeal the charge with the private parking company as BVLRA have told him that he can do so. 

If that challenge wins - all well and good.  End of story.

If the challenge fails, the OP would then have to consider whether to sue his lease company on the grounds that the term in the hire contract was unfair under the CRA.   With no guarantee - of course - of winning, but a legitimate argument.

MobileSaver

Okell said:

I'm not sure I share your confidence in believing that the BVLRA would not be so foolish as to give wrong advice. 

Maybe you're right and I'm the one being naive but it would be such an easy win for the OP and so easily avoidable for the lessor/BVRLA that I'd be surprised if that was the case.

Again the BVRLA's Guide to Road Traffic Offences & Charges specifically advises that renters can appeal parking charges with both the parking company and a free independent appeals service so there's no doubt that is how the system is supposed to work.

One thing I hadn't considered until now though is that all the above is well and good but if a rogue parking company doesn't allow appeals once the charge has been paid then that does completely undermine the BVRLA's stance. I'd expect the Memorandum of Understanding between BVRLA and the two parking trade bodies to cover appeals but of course we've no way of knowing whether it does or not.

Okell said:

So your explicit suggestion to the OP would be to challenge or appeal the charge with the private parking company as BVLRA have told him that he can do so. 

Yes, absolutely. As I said to the OP directly, the court will have expected him to do this anyway - going to court should always be the last resort when all other options have failed.

Okell said:

If the challenge fails, the OP would then have to consider whether to sue his lease company on the grounds that the term in the hire contract was unfair under the CRA.   With no guarantee - of course - of winning, but a legitimate argument.

Yes, no, maybe. If the challenge fails because the charge has already been paid then yes I'd say that was a legitimate argument for an unfair term.

However if the challenge is allowed to go ahead but fails because the OP entered the wrong reg number or their payment didn't go through then in my opinion that is not a legitimate argument that the lessor's recharge term is unfair - the parking charge may be wrong/unfair but that's a separate issue.

The OP stated that the online appeals process has closed but hasn't expanded on that or said whether other appeal methods are available so I don't think we have enough information regarding that aspect.

born_again

Okell said:

born_again said:

Okell said:

born_again said:

I would say that
The BVRLA can confirm that as ACME LTD (renter) are the registered owner and keeper of the rented vehicle the authorities have to contact them regarding offences committed by the driver,

Covers it off nicely. As such they can pay & then chase driver...

But surely all that means is that the parking company has no option but to make initial contact with the hire company because the hire company is the Registered Keeper of the vehicle.  The parking company simply doesn't have anyone else to contact but the hire company as hire company's is the only name they can discover from DVLA.

But where does that give the hire company the authority to pay the charge without investigating its validity and whether it is legitimate or not?  Surely it either has to be referred to the OP or liability formally transferred to the OP?

Otherwise what is to stop unscrupulous parking companies sending out bogus "invoices" to hire companies safe in the knowledge that they'll just pay up without question?  That's bonkers surely?

born_again said:

... So how do I tell them to go to court?

You don't that is up to them.

But wonder if they could deduct this (debt) from the the regular payments & put a marker for missed/incomplete payments, thus wrecking your credit history till it's paid to them?
Or even simply declare it as a missed payment & then a default. Again wrecking credit history.

Assuming for the sake of argument that the contract term is unfair and therefore both unenforceable and unlawful under the CRA, could the hire company still do that?

If you check the parking board one thing they point out is that registered keeper does not have to say who was driving...

But that advice doesn't apply in a case like this, does it?

The hire company aren't telling the parking company who was driving the vehicle - they're telling them who it was hired to.  Just as when a parking company gets RK details from the DVLA, it doesn't tell them who the driver was.

And in any case, even if the OP was identified by the hire company as the driver, he'd still be able to challenge the charge and he'd be in a better position than he is now where the parking company has simply paid it without question and recharged him.

born_again said:

... Clearly the lease co are happy to simply pay & chase.

While not good practise & underhand. Maybe they have got fed up with people simply getting these invoices & using this method to try & make sure that they don't do it again?
End of the day if the person causing the invoice ignores it. Then it is the lease co that ends up with the problem of sorting it out & possible court action...

But none of that is relevant is it?  If the underlying term is unfair under the CRA it doesn't matter that the lease company "are happy to simply pay & chase".  Of course they're happy - it makes everything simpler for them, but it doesn't mean it's lawful under the CRA.

In any case - subject to clarification regarding the difference of opinion between @Jenni_D and @MobileSaver - I thought that so long as the hire company followed the correct procedure in transferring liability to their client, then they had no further obligation to the parking company, and so couldn't be pursued any further?

I'm having great difficulty seeing any valid argument that can justify this "we'll simply pay up and recharge the customer rather than going to the trouble of transferring liability properly - it's too much trouble"

As @Sherambler posted

Having reviewed your signed rental agreement we can see that on page 3 it states under charges that ‘All charges and legal costs for any congestion charge, road-traffic, parking offences or any other offence involving the rental vehicle, including costs from the vehicle being clamped, seized or towed away. You will accept that we will pay and recharge with a reasonable administration fee’.

Seems clear cut being covered. That they are doing nothing wrong. 
We have no idea what OP did, but many of the posts in the parking board are just looking for a way out of breeching the rules of the private parking.

Bes I think was no spaces in car park, so just stopped & waited while passenger nipped to shop.. If that is not parking.... Yet they were looking for a way out as they had not parked in a space. 

sjs2013

I think at this stage I'll write to the parking company to appeal the case. However their online appeal process is closed & they don't have any email/phone on their website where I can contact. The only way is to contact them is writing snail mail. (I'll ask in the parking forum if anyone knows their direct email/phone)

In the mean-time I think I'll pay the renter the amount they're chasing me for - so that they cannot mess up my credit file.

If the parking company doesn't get back to me within say a few weeks I'll file a small claims court against the renter for unfair contract terms. 

MobileSaver

sjs2013 said:

I think at this stage I'll write to the parking company to appeal the case. ... In the mean-time I think I'll pay the renter the amount they're chasing me for

Sounds like a plan and that's what I would do in your shoes as it stops a bad situation getting worse and potentially gives you three bites of the cherry to get a satisfactory outcome.

If the online appeals process in your case really is closed then for the sake of a stamp/email I'd also point this out to the BVRLA and see what their response is - this may give you an advantage in future correspondence with the parking company and/or leasing company and/or court?

sjs2013 said:

If the parking company doesn't get back to me within say a few weeks I'll file a small claims court against the renter for unfair contract terms.

There's an irony here that you almost want the parking company to be so dishonest and/or incompetent that they don't even consider your appeal as that gives you much more ammunition for a successful claim against the leasing company.

sjs2013

MobileSaver said:

sjs2013 said:

I think at this stage I'll write to the parking company to appeal the case. ... In the mean-time I think I'll pay the renter the amount they're chasing me for

There's an irony here that you almost want the parking company to be so dishonest and/or incompetent that they don't even consider your appeal as that gives you much more ammunition for a successful claim against the leasing company.

I don't want the parking company to be dishonest. but from previous personal/collective experience I can't really have high hopes, can I?

noitsnotme

MobileSaver said:

There's an irony here that you almost want the parking company to be so dishonest and/or incompetent that they don't even consider your appeal as that gives you much more ammunition for a successful claim against the leasing company.

They all are anyway, they're not exactly known to be pillars of the community or supportive of the motorist, they're just in it to make money any way they can.  I predict there is zero chance a private parking company will consider an appeal after the fine has been paid.  I wouldn't be surprised if they completely ignore it.  Although it sounds like the OP needs to jump through some hoops before going back to the BVRLA.

nopcns

Having had to trawl through this thread after a question about it over on the Parking forum, the simple answer to the OPs question about how to progress to a court where a truly independent arbiter, a judge, will decide whether the OP owes a debt to "ACME", is to make a claim against "ACME" on MCOL for a refund of the charges they have taken from your account.

Anyone who is fairly confident can claim as a litigant-in-person in Part 27 proceedings in the County Court (commonly but wrongly described as "the Small Claims Court").  Each party is responsible for their own legal costs whether they win or lose and the claim for up to £300 can be issued online for a fee of £35 at https://moneyclaimonline.gov.uk which also gives useful advice if you want to have a look at what is involved.  Your claim will automatically be listed as being for a total of £335 (or whatever amount being claimed up to £300), i.e. the successful party gets their Court fees back.

The OP has a good case to make a claim. All they have to do is send ACME a Letter Before Claim(LBC) informing them they have 14 days in which to refund the sum they have withdrawn from the account or you will issue a County Court Claim. You can tell them in the letter that they are in breach if the contract because they have misinterpreted the section that states the hirer is liable for any "parking offences". Unless the parking operator (PPC) is a statutory authority, which we all know they aren't, then no "offence" can have been committed. ACME has gone beyond its remit and breached the contract by paying a speculative invoice from an unregulated private parking company, which is not one of the conditions of the contract.

The LBC does not cost anything and is worth sending to see how they respond. If they are intellectually malnourished enough not to understand the issue and either do not respond or refuse to refund the money, then you can either have your bluff called or go ahead and make the claim for £35 and have some fun with them.

Alderbank

Government websites are far from perfect but this one says:

...penalty charge notices (PCN) are fines for minor driving offences. They will not appear on your criminal record unless a court gives you a conviction because of one.

https://www.gov.uk/tell-employer-or-college-about-criminal-record/driving-convictions#:~:text=Fixed%20penalty%20notices%20(FPN)%20and,a%20conviction%20because%20of%20one.

Possibly others do so as well.
Is there any higher authority such as primary legislation to show that this is wrong in law?

noitsnotme

Alderbank said:

Government websites are far from perfect but this one says:

...penalty charge notices (PCN) are fines for minor driving offences. They will not appear on your criminal record unless a court gives you a conviction because of one.

https://www.gov.uk/tell-employer-or-college-about-criminal-record/driving-convictions#:~:text=Fixed%20penalty%20notices%20(FPN)%20and,a%20conviction%20because%20of%20one.

Possibly others do so as well.
Is there any higher authority such as primary legislation to show that this is wrong in law?

A speculative invoice from a private parking company is not a penalty charge notice.  Penalty CNs and fines can not be issued by private companies.