Parking Charge on Company Fleet Vehicle - Pay and Recharge Appeal Options

Hoenir

fisherjim said:

Hoenir said:

farleys_rusk said:

I'm an employee with a company vehicle, not involved with fleet decision-making so I have no visibility on what agreement is in place between my employer and our fleet management company.

Your employer presumably has a published policy regarding employees responsibilities when utilising a company vehicle though. From your employers perspective time costs money and there won't be the administrative resource to micro manage every situation that arises. 

I disagree, how can you make such sweeping statements?

I had a fleet of 19 vehicles, under my control and I never allowed any auto paying of anything!

Nothing sweeping about having company policies covering a vast array of topics. I can only assume you either had no issues with your fleet and or you had sufficient free time in your working day to deal with matters personally. Generally most companies are focussed on the business itself and not on non productive matters. 

GrumpyDil

farleys_rusk said:

No there is no further detail specifically on parking charges just the comments on “fines” and “parking fees” as mentioned above.

Whilst this looks a good area to discuss with my employer it would still be good to understand if all avenues of appeal directly with the unregulated private parking companies is extinguished by the fact that the charge has already been paid by a 3rd party.

There is nothing in that policy which appears to cover the payment of speculative invoices from private parking companies. 

I would probably ask your emoyer for clarification on that because they should not be settling speculative invoices under that term. 

LDast

You and your company fleet management need to get their heads around the difference between a "fine" from an authority such as a council or the police issued under statutory law and a speculative "invoice" from an unregulated private parking company for an alleged breach of contract by the driver.

PCNs issued by private companies are only enforceable under civil law, based on the principle that by parking on private land, the driver agrees to the terms and conditions set out by the landowner or its agent (the parking company). PCNs issued by private companies are not automatically enforceable. For a PPC to be able to enforce a PCN, they would need to demonstrate in court that a contract was formed, that its terms were clearly displayed, and that the motorist breached those terms. This is a matter of civil law, not statutory law.

By denying the day to day keeper of the vehicle the right to appeal the invoice, they are acting unlawfully. While consumer protection laws typically apply to transactions between businesses and consumers, there are still some elements that might be considered when dealing with fleet management and PCNs issued by PPCs.

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (now largely replaced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015): These regulations may be relevant if the fleet management company or employer has terms that are deemed unfair to the employee. For example, if an employee was automatically charged for a PCN without a clear and fair process or without the opportunity to appeal, this could be seen as an unfair contractual term, especially if the employee is unaware or has not consented to this.

Consumer Rights Act 2015: This Act provides general protections for consumers against unfair terms and conditions. While employees are not traditionally viewed as "consumers" under this Act when engaging with their employer, if there’s any transactional element involved (e.g., charges being passed on for services like parking or similar), there could be an argument that the terms were unfair if the employee was not given adequate opportunity to dispute the charge.

Given that the employee is being charged for the PCN and an additional admin fee without the ability to appeal, several employment laws are also relevant:

The Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) protects employees from unlawful deductions from wages. A deduction is unlawful unless it is:

• Required or authorised by legislation.
• Allowed by the employee’s contract of employment.
• Agreed to in writing by the employee before it is made.

In this case, if the employment contract does not specifically cover deductions for PCNs from PPCs, and there is no clear policy in place regarding such charges, the deduction for the PCN and admin fee may be considered unlawful. The employee could challenge this deduction through an employment tribunal.

Employment law requires employers to act fairly and reasonably in their dealings with employees. If the company’s policy only refers to "fines" and does not specifically mention PCNs from PPCs (which are not legally fines), the company (or its agent) is acting unreasonably in automatically paying the PCN and charging the employee without allowing an appeal.

If the company policy is vague or misleading, particularly if it refers only to "fines" and not to private parking charges, this could be seen as a form of misrepresentation. An employee might reasonably assume that PCNs from PPCs are not covered under this policy, especially since such charges are not statutory fines but rather contractual charges.

Coupon-mad

And yes, once a private PCN is paid there is not a single PPC who will consider an appeal.  The term is clearly unfair in the context of the rogue parking industry,

fisherjim

Hoenir said:

fisherjim said:

Hoenir said:

farleys_rusk said:

I'm an employee with a company vehicle, not involved with fleet decision-making so I have no visibility on what agreement is in place between my employer and our fleet management company.

Your employer presumably has a published policy regarding employees responsibilities when utilising a company vehicle though. From your employers perspective time costs money and there won't be the administrative resource to micro manage every situation that arises. 

I disagree, how can you make such sweeping statements?

I had a fleet of 19 vehicles, under my control and I never allowed any auto paying of anything!

Nothing sweeping about having company policies covering a vast array of topics. I can only assume you either had no issues with your fleet and or you had sufficient free time in your working day to deal with matters personally. Generally most companies are focussed on the business itself and not on non productive matters. 

Once again a sweeping statement, my team covered London, you think we didn't have problems, I did not have "sufficient free time" we dealt with it, the lease company is huge and my company is the biggest company in its sector on the planet!

Try winding your neck in, some companies have a little more regard for their valuable staff (who also have more pressing things to do) than you have!