PCN on private land issued by MET - Southgate Park Stansted [Merged]

southgate_park

Yes! Map is Exhibit A. 

KXL88

Oh no, I am currently 'stung' by MET parking at McDs. Reason for PCN, customer was not on site. 

I was on site for 15 mins it took me to eat a McFlurry. I even ran into the warden, who was asking ppl if they parked a car there, if yes, reg please. I offered to give my reg, warden said it's ok, I saw you enter and that's (pointed) your car yes? I have noted it. He did not!

I returned to the McDs today to speak to the manager, he reviewed the internal footage, he gave me this name, confirmed that CCTV showed me on the day speaking to the warden whilst ordering food on self-service kiosk wearing a certain colour, I did wear that colour on the day. Mananger told me do NOT pay MET, he will try to get it cancelled for me, and took down PCN and VRM details but if not, do appeal it, including info that I had spoken to the manager (name) and take it from there. 

Now i'm thinking if I should wait for it to be cancelled by the manager of McDs? Or go ahead with my appeal (leased vehicle one) which at present is still in my leasing company's name, but alreayd been forwarded my deatils for them to re-issue (with a new date). Any tips on what to do this in instance welcomed. 

Also the rubbish 'proof' of me breaching this by MET is just 4 pics of vehicle time stamped 5 mins apart. Only shows vehicle present and parked at those times, not me 'outside' the premisis.   

Coupon-mad

If the manager fails, ask for that CCTV footage and send it as a formal complaint to MET.

Then as a formal complaint to the BPA with your evidence to

 aos@britishparking.co.uk

AND please stick around to complete the Public Consultation about regulating the private parking industry. The Government is about to launch the Consultation any week now, we believe.

You should respond to the MHCLG with your evidence if the scam the warden played on you, even if no question fits it!

KXL88

Coupon-mad said:

If the manager fails, ask for that CCTV footage and send it as a formal complaint to MET.

Then as a formal complaint to the BPA with your evidence to

 aos@britishparking.co.uk

Thank you, I will try, but doubt the McD manager will handover CCTV footage, and yes I intend to email BPA to complain, thank you for the email.

However I'm in 2 minds of the (assumed) cancellation of the PCN by the McDs manager.

As I lease my car, I pay a £10 admin fee for the pleasure of them forwarding such PCNS. 

If I appeal myself, when MET discontinues, I will have proof in writing / email and can claim back the £10 admin fee. 

If the manager cancels, and the PCN no longer exists on their website to even go and have a look, I would have no means to get back my £10, and MET 'still wins' as I'm out of pocket.

Wonder if anyone else was in this predicament on a leased car.

Of course if you are not on leased car, either way being discontinued is fine (no pun intended)

Decisions decisions

Coupon-mad

You can certainly appeal and admit to driving and say that the McDonalds manager has footage proving the conversation their 'warden' had with you.

You can also say you'll report MET to the BPA and DVLA if they persist.

KXL88

Thank you as always for all the info, I did plan A, and it worked.

The McDs manager was true to his word, and cancelled it. Tried to login to their MET Parking website with the details, was working fine yesterday. Today, it no longer exist!

Hats off to that manager who took the time, and didn't tell me to go appeal instead, and took the time to check CCTV and made me repeat that I would not pay it, and canceled it.

How to show my lease company through written proof from the parking company had cancelled it? I hatched a cunning plan.

I wrote a complaint  to MET Parking on how I was UNABLE TO PAY THE FINE! and that i was desperate to 'get this off my back,'

They responded within 30 mins (despite auto response stating up to 28 days) with

'Good afternoon,

Thank you for your correspondence. We can confirm that the above parking charge has been cancelled and is now closed.

It follows that the charge is no longer due.

Kind regards

Customer Services

MET Parking Services Ltd'

Didn't see that one coming haha!

Coupon-mad

LOL well done.

southgate_park

POPLA have just sent me MET services appeal.. and it’s long and the short of it is that I should have read the signs properly!

Theres now a comments section for me to refute their claims !

Im not sure there’s more I can say, as I’ve pretty much done a lengthy piece on airport maps etc !

I welcome direction from here as I wasn’t expecting a comments section.

I could post METS evidence here, if anyone would like to comment?

southgate_park

Would this be the sort of thing POPA require as a comment on METS appeal ?

In section ‘A’ ‘Case Summary’ of MET’s response under heading “No keeper liability” MET stated: “An area being part of a parcel of land surrounding an airport does not automatically mean that statutory control is in place for that particular area.”

No one has said that a parcel of land surrounding an airport cannot be relevant land. Only the land within the airport boundary is not relevant. This site is indisputably within Stansted Airport and is therefore not 'relevant land', as demonstrated by the maps I have provided. MET has failed to show otherwise.

Even though the car park may be private land, it indisputably sits within the boundary of Stansted Airport. 

The Airport site is under statutory control; all Airports are.  The Airports Act 1986 indicates that Stansted Airport Limited, as an Airport Authority and Highways Authority, falls under statutory control.  MET cannot simply disregard airport bylaws by claiming the land is private. Airport bylaws regulate conduct on ALL land within the airport boundary, including private areas like this car park.

Therefore PoFA is not applicable to MET’s Notice To Keeper. The fact that they've used Schedule 4 wording in it misleads a keeper recipient and this is something POPLA should raise as a concern with the BPA.

In section ‘A’ ‘Case Summary’ of MET’s response under heading “No evidence of landowner authority” MET stated “Our contract with the landowner grants us authority to form contracts with motorists and issue parking charge notices for contractual breach”.

No one has argued that they don't have a contract to issue PCNs. The argument is that they cannot rely on PoFA to hold the keeper liable for any PCN issued.

MET are claiming that they have included a contract with the landowner. In fact, they have included a contract with McDonald's, with no evidence that McDonald's are the landowner. It is highly unlikely that McDonald's are the landowner and are, rather, a lessee of the land. Either way, no evidence of McDonald's being the landowner has been provided. In addition, MET claim that their contract with McDonald's "grants [them] authority to form contracts with motorists and issue parking charge notices for contractual breach." However, MET's own evidence of this contract with McDonald's in Section E only mentions MET being entitled to pursue the driver of the vehicle for unpaid parking charges, NOT the keeper. There is therefore no evidence of any landowner granting special permissions for MET parking to be exempt from airport bylaws.

As previously stated, and as agreed by POPLA as recently as February 2025, this particular site is NOT relevant land as it lies within an airport boundary and within the boundary of statutory land. The operator has provided no evidence to suggest that the boundary set out on the map provided that I have provided is incorrect. As the burden to disprove my evidence lies with MET and they have not done so, this appeal should be upheld.

southgate_park

On the POPLA appeals page is the following an invite to comment