Excel Parking - Payment meters out of service

rolloverbeethoven

On 17th October 2024 I parked on the Excel car park at The Square, Chorlton, Manchester. On the day in question all the payment meters were bagged over with a notice attached "pay meter not in use" and instructions to call connect cashless and quote a given code. This I did but after entering my bank card nothing happened so I tried again with the same result. People at the other pay machines also seemed to be having problems. I couldn't hang around any longer as I was on my way to a dentist appointment. When I got home I called Excel and explained the problem I had encountered and the person I spoke to gave me their name and suggested that if I received a PCN I should explain my position and refer to my phone call with them and the recorded time. Needless to say A PCN was received ten days later.
I appealed the PCN giving the facts I have mentioned and offered payment of the £1.50 I had been unable to make. Below is the response I have received:

"We refer to your appeal in respect of the above Charge Notice (CN) received on 29/10/2024.

Having considered the points you have raised and reviewed our records, we are unable to accept your appeal. Our main reason(s) for this decision are as follows:

The signs at the car park make it clear that a valid payment must be made for all vehicles which park/enter the car park, giving clear notice that the land is private property and that a Charge of £100 will be levied if vehicles park outside of the Terms and Conditions displayed; signs also state that when a payment is made, the full and accurate vehicle registration number of the vehicle parked must be entered. The above detailed vehicle parked without a valid payment of the parking tariff for the vehicle on site and you became liable for the Charge advertised.

In your appeal you have confirmed to us that on the date in question, you were the driver of the vehicle at the time it parked in the car park.

We note your comment that you were unable to purchase a ticket because the machine was not working. In those circumstances if you were unable to use another ticket machine (if one was present) or use an alternative method of payment (Connect and RingGo apps are available on site), you should have sought alternative parking or phoned the helpline. By failing to make payment for the period of parking in question, you became liable for the Charge Notice

issued.

We note that you called the telephone Helpline on the day in question, however the evidence provided by yourself, shows that this call was not made at the time your vehicle parked and was only made after the contravention had already been recorded.

We maintain that the signs on this site meet the requirements set by the International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice. The signs are large, prominent and legible, so that any reasonable user of the car park would be aware of their existence and nature, and would have a fair opportunity to read them if he or she wished to do so. It can never be a defence to a claim in contract law to say, "I did not read the terms", so long as the existence of those terms is reasonably advertised. We have fully reviewed this case and we are satisfied that the Charge Notice was correctly issued. We are unable to accept the mitigating circumstances raised in your representations, your appeal is therefore rejected and the charge will stand; photographic evidence which supports this can be viewed at www.myparkingcharge.co.uk."

Should I now appeal to IAS or simply do nothing.

Coupon-mad

Do nothing.

Read the recent posts about Connect Cashless not working.

rolloverbeethoven

I have now received a letter of claim  from DCB Legal. I will email a response on the lines suggested but have a couple of questions:
- what is the purpose of including the wording "I am sourcing and seeking independent debt advice" in my email
- I was unable to pay the parking charge as the machine wasn't working and payment by phone kept aborting (other people appeared to be having the same problem). A this stage should I make an SAR asking how many PCNs were issued by Excel on the day in question because the machines were out of action
- in response to my appeal Excel stated that I should have sought alternative parking or phoned the helpline. This is not shown anywhere in their signage or terms & conditions on the site
- at what point should I ask for proof that Excel have landowner's authority

Le_Kirk

The point of the request to ask for more time is to .... well, gain more time to allow you to read and learn and gather your information and evidence. But only if you really need more time. The current recommendation is not to request a SAR as it is better to have vague particulars.

Coupon-mad

Only delay the claim if you'd prefer it to arrive in March rather than February. That's your call.

No SAR! You positively WANT a vague claim!  And this info isn't your data so you won't get it (at all) anyway:

"how many PCNs were issued by Excel on the day in question because the machines were out of action"

rolloverbeethoven

Thank you Le_Kirk and Coupon-mad for your valuable guidance. I will post the outcome in due course.

Nellymoser

Practices like Excel's are reason MPs and campaigners are calling for statutory regulation for the private parking industry. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81193608/#Comment_81193608

I ask you to join the motorists call by signing/share this petition demanding the re-launch of a Govt-backed Parking Code of Practice. 🙏

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/701453

rolloverbeethoven

I have now received a Letter Before Claim from Elms Legal. The first line of the letter says "We write further to our Notification of Instruction letter dated,. No date has been entered and I have received no such letter form Elms. Notice of Intended Legal Action and Letter of Claim were sent by DCB Legal.
I am about to respond to the LBC but is the absence of a Notice of Instruction significant.

Coupon-mad

No it's not important. So you had a LBC dated January from DCB Legal. Now a fresh LBC dated June, from Elms Legal?

Play the game. Same reply as previously.

rolloverbeethoven

I am confused as I received a LOC from dcbLegal on 8 January to which I responded with the suggested template.
Then on 3 June I have received a LBC from Elms Legal. Does this infer that Excel Parking has switched from DCB to Elms.
Elms LBC states the reason for issue of the PCN is "for breaching the Terms and Conditions situated at ......"
Does this mean that the LBC is non compliant. Also at what stage should I ask for proof that Excel have a contract with the landowner.
I would welcome some clarification please

Car1980

Excel also use Elms and tend to use them for cases where they want to take it all the way to a hearing. But seems like a good case to defend to me. You tried to offer them the money.

A Letter Before Claim can't really be non-compliant, so ignore that.

Just wait for the court claim.

See this though: https://imgur.com/Mhmrbcz

If you're in Manchester I'd even consider applying to get it heard in Bradford.