Arval paying parking charges. 15 parking charges due to error.

Fruitcake

I would send that nine times, once for each PCN they have erroneously paid. I also suggest you add the wording I used previously on this thread that by paying the charges themselves, Arval have accepted liability by conduct.

If they have already taken money, tell them in no uncertain terms that this is unlawful and will be put in dispute with your financial provider, but you retain the right to take legal action against Arval if money is taken again, and/or any monies already taken are not reimbursed.

Insurance_gal2004

Thanks! 

So shall I add the following;

“By paying these charges yourselves, you have accepted that you are liable by conduct.”

Thankfully they haven’t charged me yet but sent me an invoice which will be coming out of my bank at start of March! 

Coupon-mad

version of the hirer’s agreement. 

Odd typo above, otherwise, it is good to go and you must tell your Bank to refuse the payment in March.

Insurance_gal2004

Hi all. Thought I would give an update…

Absolutely no response back! 

But I do have another invoice sent through for April. I’ll need to cancel the one coming out from 1st March but tbh thought they would have responded by now. 

Would you chase them or cancel payment and go from there? Thanks 

Exodi

Insurance_gal2004 said:

Thanks everyone. 

This is on page 2 of the contract;

In the event that you should incur a fine or intended prosecution notice, your details will be passed to the relevant authorities, where we are able to. When this is not possible, we will pay the fine on your behalf and recharge you. An administration fee of £15 including VAT will be charged for each notice we receive. This charge is payable regardless of whether the fine is upheld or overturned.

I find this quite interesting, when did you sign this lease?

Reason I ask is I have a lease with Arval signed 1.5 years ago and it no longer states about the possibility of them paying the 'fine' on your behalf, and it also correctly includes the term 'charges'. They may have multiple versions of their contracts, or they may have possibly updated their template if your contract is older?

12 LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY

12.1 In respect of any responsibility, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, or expenses (including legal fees) resulting from fines, penalties and/or charges for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions in connection with Vehicles (the "Liability"): (a) ARVAL has no responsibility for the Liability; (b) the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action; and (c) the Hirer indemnifies ARVAL and holds ARVAL harmless against the Liability. ARVAL will be entitled to charge the Hirer a reasonable administration fee for any work carried out or documentation processed relating to the Liability.

This wording seems much more sensible than yours.

The most contentious point is further down the page, where it states:

12.6 The Hirer will at all times keep accurate records of the driver of each Vehicle, and when reasonably requested to do so will provide such details to ARVAL.

Maybe Arval have a reason for this I'm unaware of, but I certainly hope it's not to aid private parking operators...

Mikeh2001

Exodi said

12 LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY

12.1 In respect of any responsibility, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, or expenses (including legal fees) resulting from fines, penalties and/or charges for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions in connection with Vehicles (the "Liability"): (a) ARVAL has no responsibility for the Liability; (b) the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action; and (c) the Hirer indemnifies ARVAL and holds ARVAL harmless against the Liability. ARVAL will be entitled to charge the Hirer a reasonable administration fee for any work carried out or documentation processed relating to the Liability.

That's an unfair contract term, if I ever saw one.

Exodi

Mikeh2001 said:

Exodi said

12 LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY

12.1 In respect of any responsibility, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, or expenses (including legal fees) resulting from fines, penalties and/or charges for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions in connection with Vehicles (the "Liability"): (a) ARVAL has no responsibility for the Liability; (b) the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action; and (c) the Hirer indemnifies ARVAL and holds ARVAL harmless against the Liability. ARVAL will be entitled to charge the Hirer a reasonable administration fee for any work carried out or documentation processed relating to the Liability.

That's an unfair contract term, if I ever saw one.

Care to expand?

Mikeh2001

Exodi said:

Mikeh2001 said:

Exodi said

12 LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY

12.1 In respect of any responsibility, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, or expenses (including legal fees) resulting from fines, penalties and/or charges for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions in connection with Vehicles (the "Liability"): (a) ARVAL has no responsibility for the Liability; (b) the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action; and (c) the Hirer indemnifies ARVAL and holds ARVAL harmless against the Liability. ARVAL will be entitled to charge the Hirer a reasonable administration fee for any work carried out or documentation processed relating to the Liability.

That's an unfair contract term, if I ever saw one.

Care to expand?

Maybe a mis interpretation of the words on my behalf - but "the hirer accepts all responsibility for the liability" doesn't seem a very fair term.  As a consumer I think want to be given the opportunity to evaluate my liability for any so-called "offences".

Insurance_gal2004

Exodi said:

Insurance_gal2004 said:

Thanks everyone. 

This is on page 2 of the contract;

In the event that you should incur a fine or intended prosecution notice, your details will be passed to the relevant authorities, where we are able to. When this is not possible, we will pay the fine on your behalf and recharge you. An administration fee of £15 including VAT will be charged for each notice we receive. This charge is payable regardless of whether the fine is upheld or overturned.

I find this quite interesting, when did you sign this lease?

Reason I ask is I have a lease with Arval signed 1.5 years ago and it no longer states about the possibility of them paying the 'fine' on your behalf, and it also correctly includes the term 'charges'. They may have multiple versions of their contracts, or they may have possibly updated their template if your contract is older?

12 LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY

12.1 In respect of any responsibility, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, or expenses (including legal fees) resulting from fines, penalties and/or charges for parking, driving or similar offences or contraventions in connection with Vehicles (the "Liability"): (a) ARVAL has no responsibility for the Liability; (b) the Hirer accepts all responsibility for the Liability including taking all appropriate action; and (c) the Hirer indemnifies ARVAL and holds ARVAL harmless against the Liability. ARVAL will be entitled to charge the Hirer a reasonable administration fee for any work carried out or documentation processed relating to the Liability.

This wording seems much more sensible than yours.

The most contentious point is further down the page, where it states:

12.6 The Hirer will at all times keep accurate records of the driver of each Vehicle, and when reasonably requested to do so will provide such details to ARVAL.

Maybe Arval have a reason for this I'm unaware of, but I certainly hope it's not to aid private parking operators...

Hi! That is odd as I only signed my contract in July 2024 so maybe they used an older template. 

Find it odd that no one has come back to me. Obviously my latest email to them was quite strongly worded so hope it doesn’t come back to bite me. I owe them £675 in total split over two months. 

Coupon-mad

No you don't.