Met Parking Services Notice to Keeper Parking Charge

busymerchbee73

Hi All, 
Totally new to this and looking for some help please.

I've received a parking charge NTK for parking at BP Stansted SF Connect for 49 minutes (30mins permitted).  I was totally unware of the parking restrictions and simply sat in my car for 49 minutes waiting for a delayed flight to land.  Can anyone advise how best to reply of appeal for this charge? 

Coupon-mad

Welcome.

Just use the NEWBIES FAQS thread resource.

2 clicks back. See my signature.

busymerchbee73

Perfect, thanks Coupon-mad for your help. 

So, please can I ask... I don't really have any extra evidence or sound reason to dispute the charge... So, therefore I will be sticking with key points of "insufficient signage" and "disproportionate charge"...... is that enough, or should I make up that driver had migraine?  

Also, I didn't spend anything in the shop, I didn't get out of my car at all, not even to use the toilet - is it still worth driver appealing to BP Stansted shop with plan A?

Thanks in advance for all your help.

Coupon-mad

 So, therefore I will be sticking with key points of "insufficient signage" and "disproportionate charge".

You aren't planning on using the winning point then?!

  

Please re-read the NEWBIES thread and pay particular attention to not saying who was driving.

I think you missed the bit about 'digging deeper into 'POFA 2012/lack of keeper liability' and the linked thread of NTK pictures showing you what a non-POFA one from MET looks like.  You know.  Just like your one?!

1505grandad

A heads-up:-

"...... or should I make up that driver had migraine..."

It is the scammers (Hansard) that make up things and lie  -  this forum does not.

busymerchbee73

Thank you both for replies.

I'm struggling understanding some of this and thank you for your patience.  

I've had a look at the link you suggested and digging deeper into 'POFA 2012/lack of keeper liability' - and yes, my NTK looks just like the one posted there. 

So, I'm changing my reply and have added in the POFA 2012/lack of keeper liability.  Please could you cast your eye over my appeal and let me know what you think?  Your advice has been invaluable.

I am writing to formally contest the parking charge notice issued on April 17th, referencing the vehicle registered under my name. As the registered keeper, I decline to disclose the driver's identity, as it is not a requirement under my obligations.

I am well aware that under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA 2012), parking operators must meet specific criteria, including sending a Notice to Keeper (NTK) within the designated timeframe and adhering to the prescribed format.

Upon thorough examination of the provided documentation, it is apparent that the Notice to Keeper fails to meet the stipulations outlined in POFA 2012. Crucially, the NTK lacks mandatory information as mandated by law, rendering any attempt to establish keeper liability invalid.

Consequently, as the registered keeper, I bear no liability for this parking charge. I hereby request a cessation of any further communication pertaining to this matter and urge the cancellation of the parking charge notice accordingly.

Furthermore, I would like to highlight additional reasons for my refusal to comply with your demand for payment:

1. Insufficient Signage: The car park in question lacks adequate signage to clarify relevant parking restrictions. Consequently, no contract can be legally formed between the driver and the landowner, rendering all issued tickets invalid.

2. Disproportionate Charge: The imposed £100 parking charge lacks commercial justification and is disproportionate to any alleged breach of contract or trespass. This arbitrary charge far exceeds any reasonable cost to the landowner, as parking fees are non-existent, thus rendering your demand excessive.

Should you choose to reject this appeal or fail to address the concerns raised, I expect compliance with the BPA AOS Code of Practice 22.12. Kindly provide all necessary information, including the contract between your company and the landowner, along with the requisite 'POPLA code', for immediate referral of this matter.

Furthermore, I request evidence demonstrating your authority to demand payments and issue parking charge notices within the car park in question. Please furnish a copy of the contract granting you such rights, along with instructions received from BP Stansted regarding imposed time limits and sanctions on customers.

Additionally, please clarify the basis of your claim – whether it pertains to trespass, breach of contract, or a contractually agreed sum. If claiming trespass, I require a comprehensive breakdown of the actual loss incurred by your business or the landowner. Conversely, if alleging breach of contract or a contractually agreed sum, kindly provide a copy of the purported contract entered into by the driver.

I anticipate written confirmation of the resolution of this matter and assurance that no further action will be taken against me as the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Please respond to this appeal within 14 days of this letter's date. Failure to do so may necessitate further escalation, including formal complaints to relevant authorities.

Thank you for your attention to this appeal, and I await your prompt response.

 

busymerchbee73

I sent the above... I hope it's an okay appeal, but let me know if anyone has any advice.  Thanks again.

Coupon-mad

All fine except this isn't a valid point (no harm done):

1. Disproportionate Charge: The imposed £100 parking charge lacks commercial justification and is disproportionate to any alleged breach of contract or trespass. This arbitrary charge far exceeds any reasonable cost to the landowner, as parking fees are non-existent, thus rendering your demand excessive.

busymerchbee73

Thank you so much Coupon-mad.  Your knowledge and time spent on this is fully appreciated.

So, I've received back a shirty response (see below) and guessing my next stage is POPLA?  Do I stand a chance still do you think?

The terms and conditions of parking are clearly stated on the signs prominently displayed around this site. These include that parking is for customers whilst on the premises only and that there is a maximum permitted stay in this area of 30 minutes. Your vehicle remained on site for longer than the maximum permitted stay therefore we believe the charge was issued correctly and we are upholding it.

The fact that our clients display our signs on their premises demonstrates that there is landowner authority, however, if the matter should proceed to court for collection and the court require a copy of formal landowner consent one will be provided to the court at that time.

The charge amount is in line with the British Parking Association’s (BPA’s) Code of Practice, in which it states that they do not expect the amount the motorist is being asked to pay to exceed £100.00. We are confident there are sufficient signs at this location bringing the terms and conditions of parking to the attention of motorists and it remains the driver's responsibility to check the signs where they park and comply with the terms and conditions.
This decision, which has been based on the facts of the case and takes into account our consideration of any mitigating circumstances, is our final decision.

You have reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and you now have a number of options: 1. Pay or, if you were not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the incident, request the driver to pay the parking charge at the prevailing price of £60.00 within 14 days of today's date. Please note that if payment is not received by this date the parking charge will be payable at £100.00 and further costs will accrue if the case is passed to our debt resolution agents for collection or if we need to proceed with court action to collect the money due to us. Payment may be made online at www.paymetparking.com or by phone on 020 3781 7471. 2. Make an appeal to POPLA, the Independent Appeals Service, within 28 days of the date of this letter by going to the online appeals system at: www.popla.co.uk using verification code: 88888888 Please note that POPLA will consider the evidence of both parties and make their decision based upon the facts and application of the relevant law. Please note that if you opt to appeal to POPLA, and should POPLA's decision NOT go in your favour, you will be required to pay the full amount of £100.00. Please note if the contravention occurred in Scotland only the driver may appeal to POPLA. By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA as explained above. 3. If you choose to do nothing, we will seek to recover the monies owed to us via our debt recovery procedures and may proceed with court action.

Gr1pr

Standard template response , we are right, you are wrong, if you don't like it take it further 

Yes your next task is a proper appeal to Popla, as explained in the newbies sticky thread in announcements 

Everybody stands a chance at Popla, the result from POPLA is binding on the parking company but not binding on you 

POPLA is an ADR , where you win or lose 

The stage after Popla if you lose is pay or civil court, if the claimant kept going after you 

busymerchbee73

Lovely, thanks very much Gr1pr for your help - much appreciated again.