IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.

UKPC Hired Car

Hello, I'm back with another one!

I was the hirer of a vehicle when the driver was given a PCN by UKPC. The PCN is dated 23/03/2018 and the lessor hasn't notified me yet of any communication from UKPC. I have instructed them not to pay it and forward any letters from UKPC to me.

Have a look at them pictures!

HZbrsdm.jpg
KLntaGL.jpg
Ch0slu5.jpg
zl1NxSK.jpg
ZLwiyPW.jpg
5TrHYvo.jpg
rubGQnM.jpg

I am now drafting myappeal the charge as the hirer:

Dear Sir/Madam
Re: PCN No.

I challenge this 'PCN' as lessee of the car and subsequently request all future correspondence be sent directly to myself at the address listed below:

My street:
My Town:
My Postcode:

I am the vehicle's hirer and keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definitions under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) and as such, the registered keeper is not the "keeper" (as defined under POFA); UKPC has no reason to contact the lessor regarding this PCN.

I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers. There are no signs in the vicinity of the parking space. There is also no lighting on the signs so these cannot be read at night.

Further, I understand you do not own the car park and you have given me no information about your policy with the landowner or on site businesses, to issue such a charge. So please supply that policy as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either offer me a POPLA code or cancel the charge.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.

Yours faithfully,

What do you guys think?
«13

Comments

  • In our recent experience, UKPC are now playing silly devils with lease companies by refusing to transfer liability to the hirer unless the lease company provides all of the hire documentation required under POFA - even though this is not was agreed between the BPA and the BVRLA in their Memorandum of Understanding.

    You need to "appeal" the windscreen notice in the next few days before UKPC become entitled to access the registered keeper's details from the DVLA database.

    Don't let on that the vehicle was on hire and submit your "appeal" as the vehicle's "keeper" (which POFA defines as meaning "the person by whom the vehicle is kept at the time the vehicle was parked, which in the case of a registered vehicle is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to be the registered keeper").
  • Coupon-mad
    Coupon-mad Posts: 131,601 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post Photogenic First Anniversary
    I agree, so send the usual blue template (from the NEWBIES thread) as keeper, instead (''keeper'' is a vague term).

    Do this online and BEFORE DAY 27, NO LATER! But not much earlier. We advise aiming for day 26.

    :)
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • The_Deep
    The_Deep Posts: 16,830 Forumite
    UKPC are fraudsters, read this

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html

    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

    Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

    Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
  • nigelbb
    nigelbb Posts: 3,790 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    In our recent experience, UKPC are now playing silly devils with lease companies by refusing to transfer liability to the hirer unless the lease company provides all of the hire documentation required under POFA - even though this is not was agreed between the BPA and the BVRLA in their Memorandum of Understanding.
    However that MoU is worthless as without providing the necessary documents prescribed in POFA 2012 the hirer of the vehicle cannot be held liable for parking charges incurred by the driver.
  • Edna_Basher
    Edna_Basher Posts: 782 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    The problem here is that were UKPC to get the lease company's details from the DVLA and in the event that the lease company did not correctly transfer liability to the hirer by sending all of the hire documents, UKPC may continue to pursue the lease company for payment rather than reissuing the PCN as a Notice to Hirer.

    There would then be a risk that the lease company would panic, pay the PCN and recharge the cost to the hirer.

    It's best to keep the lease company out of the loop if at all possible.
  • nosferatu1001
    nosferatu1001 Posts: 12,961 Forumite
    First Post First Anniversary Name Dropper
    nigelbb wrote: »
    However that MoU is worthless as without providing the necessary documents prescribed in POFA 2012 the hirer of the vehicle cannot be held liable for parking charges incurred by the driver.
    It isnt worthless to the hire company. Were the PPC to actually sue them, the PPC would have a tough time explaining why the agreement does not apply to them....
  • Edna_Basher
    Edna_Basher Posts: 782 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    edited 17 April 2018 at 3:59PM
    It's also worth noting that Paragraph 22.11 of the BPA Code of Practice states that a parking charge may be appealed by a vehicle keeper on the grounds that the vehicle was stolen or on hire or lease at the time the unauthorised parking took place. If the rental or lease customer's details have been provided to you by the hire or lease company, you should pursue your claim instead with their customer.

    It could be argued that the term "details" just means the hirer's name and serviceable address (just like transferring liability to a driver). However, I'm sure that the BPA would argue that "details" also includes hire documents and a statement of liability.
  • StaffsSW
    StaffsSW Posts: 5,788 Forumite
    Combo Breaker First Post First Anniversary
    I'm second guessing this, but is that vehicle from F2M/PSA Finance?

    If so, the team there are pretty clued up in regards to transferring liability, but due to the volume they process (1000s per week) they don't tend to put up as much of a fight as some other leasing companies do.
    <--- Nothing to see here - move along --->
  • andreihoff
    andreihoff Posts: 46 Forumite
    First Anniversary
    edited 17 April 2018 at 11:00PM
    The car was leased from a car repair shop with a small fleet of rental vehicles.

    Thank you for the advice Edna Basher and Coupon-Mad! I submitted my appeal on Monday and got a reply today:
    Thank you for your recent correspondence in relation to the above parking charge.
    We have investigated your appeal based on the information you have submitted and confirm that this parking charge was correctly issued because there are sufficient signs at Park Centrale Southampton advising drivers that a maximum stay of 23 hours applies.
    All of our signage is fully compliant with the guidelines set out within the BPA Code of Practice and we reject the notion that it is in any way unclear or ambiguous.
    The contract that UKPC has with the owner or occupier of the land (which authorises UKPC to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of Parking Charges in respect of parking of the vehicle on the land) contains a confidentiality clause and as such we are not in a position to provide the contract to you.
    As a member of the Approved Operator Scheme, UKPC are audited by the British Parking Association to ensure that we have all relevant contracts in place. UKPC will provide the court with a copy of this in full if they require it, or can provide a written statement to this effect from those party to the contract. We are also more than happy to provide confirmation to the independent assessors that we are authorised to manage parking at this site.
    We can confirm that parking management at this site has been contracted to UK Parking Control Ltd.
    Paragraph 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, states that we must inform the registered keeper that the driver of a vehicle is required to pay the parking charge in full. It also notes that as we do not know the driver!!!8217;s name or current postal address, the registered keeper, if they were not the driver at the time, should inform the operator (i.e. us) of the name and current address of the driver and pass the notice to them.
    The Act also warns that if, at the end of the period of 28 days (beginning with the day after the Parking Charge is sent), the parking charge has not been paid in full and the operator does not know both the name and current address of the driver, the operator has the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from the registered keeper. This warning is given under Paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to us complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of that Act (which we consider we do comply with, to the letter).
    Our Appeals process is now concluded, you may now pick one of the following options:
    1) Pay the parking charge detailed above at the reduced rate of £60 to UK Parking Control Ltd. PLEASE REFER OVERLEAF FOR PAYMENT OPTIONS AND ADDRESS DETAILS.
    2) Make an appeal to the independent adjudicator POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) using the verification code provided above. Please note that if you wish to appeal to POPLA, you will lose the right to pay the discounted rate of £60 , and should POPLA reject your appeal you will be required to pay the full amount of £100 . If you opt to pay the parking charge you will be unable to appeal with POPLA. Appeals to POPLA must be made within twenty- eight days from the date of this letter. To appeal with POPLA, please visit https://www.popla.co.uk. If you are unable to access the internet, you may appeal by post !!!8211; this must be done using a POPLA postal form which may be obtained by contacting POPLA by phone (0330 159 6126) or post (PO Box 1270, Warrington, WA4 9RL).
    By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (https://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.

    Time to got to POPLA I guess. Please correct me if I'm wrong but the next steps are:

    1. Receive notice to hirer within 21 days
    2. Check if they have asked the hire company for my details within 14 days
    3. Appeal to POPLA based on problems with 1 & 2 within 28 days?
  • KeithP
    KeithP Posts: 37,622 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    They are quoting from Paragraph 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, but have got it wrong:
    It also notes that as we do not know the driver's name or current postal address, the registered keeper, if they were not the driver at the time, should inform the operator (i.e. us) of the name and current address of the driver and pass the notice to them.
    Apart from the fact they have stated the wrong sub-paragraph, I think they mean paragraph 9(2)(e) which states:
    (e) state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
    (i) to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
    (ii) if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;
    In other words, their letter says the keeper should notify the operator of the driver's details, but the legislation says the operator can only invite the keeper to do so.

    Clearly misleading.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards