Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • francolin
    • By francolin 12th Jul 18, 5:03 AM
    • 17Posts
    • 8Thanks
    francolin
    VCS and Iceland, semi resolved.
    • #1
    • 12th Jul 18, 5:03 AM
    VCS and Iceland, semi resolved. 12th Jul 18 at 5:03 AM
    Sorry for the long post. Got a PCN recently from VCS at Iceland, Spring Bank, Hull. The reason for the charge was "Observed leaving site whilst parking at cutomer only car park"
    Didn't quite manage to get it cancelled but did manage to get the charge reduced significantly. But the whole set up that Iceland have with VCS and their reluctance to help is very suspect and quite worrying.

    Here's what hapened.
    Parked up at Iceland. Didn't have any money. walked accross the road to a cash point. Came back and went straight into the store.This took no more than 3 minutes. Bought what I wanted, came back to car and saw a notice under the wiper. Then about a week later I got a PCN through the post. I know that a lot of retailers are quite willing to help their customers and will act to get a PCN cancelled, especially if you have a receipt.

    So the next time I was in Iceland I went up to the store manager to ask if he would help. As soon as he heard the words "parking" and "ticket", he just didn't want to know and went into parrot mode, "Can't help, it's private land, we can't do anything about it you'll have to deal with it yourself". Didn't even bother looking at the receipt or the notice. Not even a pretend apology or sign of concern. Then instead of leaving it at that, he added "People shouldn't park here then go for a kebab" and walked off. Needless to say this really wound me up.

    Then I rang Iceland head office. They were no better, again, parrot mode upon hearing about a parking ticket "It's private land, we can't help". I said that it's your store and the car park has a prominent sign with your logo on it. As far as anyone using it is concerned, it's very much your car park. She then gave me a pretty silly analogy: "It would be like someone buying something from ASDA and trying to return it to Iceland, It can't happen". To which I replied, "No, it would be like me buying something from Iceland, finding it to be unsatisfactory, trying to return it and you saying sorry, we just sell it, we can't help you"! She didn't really respond to that. To be fair to the lady she did seem genuinely apologetic. But apologies aren't going to get a PCN cancelled.

    So then I thought I'd hit up their Facebook page. I've never used it before so I had to used someone elses.
    Made a short post on their page:

    "Just used one of your stores recently and ended up with a parking ticket. I've even got a receipt. Store manager was not only unhelpful but downright rude and said things to me that I won't repeat here. No other retailer has a problem with cancelling false PCNs upon proof of receipt. Whats the deal here? Very disappointed and it's completely put me off using Iceland ever again".

    I got a response from them really quite quickly asking me to PM them. Sent a private message telling them that I was the person who'd posted on their page about a PCN. I didn't give any details yet and didn't tell them what the ticket was for (this bit is important). I just told them that they needed to cancel it immediately as I have a receipt and was a legitimate customer. Then I didn't hear back from them for a few days. So I sent another message saying please don;t ignore this like one of your store managers has already done, and to treat it as an urgent matter. Still no response.

    After waiting for another couple of days, I made a new post on their page:

    "Still haven't heard anything back from you guys about a false PCN that was issued against me incorrectly at one of your stores. I've been made to feel like I've done something wrong by using one of your stores. What's the problem?"

    They responded and asked me to send them a DM (direct message?) with a message link. So I clicked on it and told them everything all over again. They responded by asking me for further details. I asked them for an email address (customer.reply@iceland.co.uk).

    This is what I said:

    I recently spoke to you on Facebook regarding a false PCN that was issued whilst using one of your stores:

    Iceland, 185-201 Spring Bank, Hull HU3 1LP.

    I was a legitimate customer at that store at the time. I even have the receipt for the date/time the alleged contravention took place. This is a completely baseless allegation and it's outrageous that a private parking company is operating at one of your stores and issuing false charge notices against your customers.

    To make matters worse, I spoke to the store manager to see if he could help. He really didn't care and didn't even wait for me to finish speaking. But what was truly unbelievable is what he said: "People shouldn't park here and go for a kebab!"

    There is so much wrong with that statement. Not only is it completeley unhelpful, it's grossly insensitive and an absolute insult.

    It's a great shame. I use that store very frequently. Twice a week, often more. This experience has left me embittered. I've been made to feel like I've done something wrong by choosing to shop at your store.

    As an actual customer you must intervene on my behalf. I know it's possible. I have evidence that I used your store and parked there legitimately. There is no reason for me to have been issued a charge. You need to look after and retain your customers. I am confident that you will help me out. Here are the details of the notice.

    Don't ignore this. i have been ignored already by both a store manager and a Customer Services representative.

    Thank you for your time. I await your favourable response.


    Again at this point, I didn't tell them what the infraction was, just gave them the number, car registration and my address.

    Several days passed again with no response. So I messaged the Facebook people. Told them still not getting anywhere and copied that email into the message. Someone replied back saying that they're sorry but customer serivices have been very busy recently and someone will look into it. I kept on pestering them occaisionally for the next day or two just to make sure they were still being responsive.

    Eventually I got an email reply and it was quite interesting:

    Dear Mr

    Thank you for confirming the details of the parking notice for us. We can see that our colleagues on Facebook have been dealing with this for you and requested some further information from you in regars to this.

    If you are able to send a copy of your receipt for this shop to them via Facebook we will be able to see if our property team are able to assist with this parking notice.

    The store have confirmed that the car park is for Iceland shoppers only an if a customer is seen going off site then a parking fine will be isuued. If you can also send a full clear copy of the PCN notice you received in the post this will help us greatly.

    We look forward to hearing from you with the required details.

    Kind regard

    Iceland Customer Care


    Now this is where I got really angry at the whole thing. I still had not told them what the reason for the ticket being issued was for. So why did they immediately come out with the "The store have confirmed that the car park is for Iceland shoppers only an if a customer is seen going off site then a parking fine will be issued"?!

    On the same day the Facebook people had also messaged me asking for the receipt (but not the PCN). Uploaded receipt. And only after that did they ask for the PCN. That's when I wrote them a lengthy message that can be read here along with what they asked for.

    They said thank you and that they'd passed the information on to the property development team and they'd requested excel to cancel the ticket but a decision could take up to 6 weeks.

    This is where I think they probably told VCS about me using the cash machine. Why?! Just flipping cancel it!

    The letter that VCS sent me said that after speaking to their client and as a gesture of goodwill they would settle for 10 instead of a gazillion.

    It seems like Iceland have a very uncomfortably close relationship with VCS, to the point where they are not only hosting them, but quite willing to accommodate them and lie for them. I don't get it. Surely you'd expect the retailer to be on side with the customer. I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't realise that this is just fundamentally bad for business. VCS referred to Iceland as their client. So who really owns that land? Why are Iceland requesting VCS to cancel it? Straight up tell them! And why are Iceland so reluctant to step in and help their customers with a PCN, because their official line is that they can't (won't) help you. It was only after many Facebook messages and emails over several days that they decided to do something. And they still haven't acknowledged, let alone addressed the behaviour of the store manager. Terrible customer service.

    I can only conclude that Iceland do indeed own that land, or at the very least they are the ones that are using VCS, not some mystery third party land owner. And it also seems that at least that particular store has a policy or culture of trying to catch people out. Bizarre.

    My advice to anyone using this store is to exercise extreme caution. Park, and get in. Don't wander off, even if it's for a reason that's perfectly consistent with normal commerce. Or even better, just don't use Iceland. I certainly won't be ever again (now that the cheeky sods have got my email address, they keep sending me offers). And if you do get a charge notice, don't take no for an answer and keep on pestering them.

    I'm contemplating whether or not to post on their Facebook page again with what happened and to question their policies publicly. But at the same time I don't want that to have an adverse effect on anyone else that might be trying to get a cancellation via that method.

    I know this is a long post. If anyone has any suggestions for chopping it up or formatting it better, please tell me.

    What a racket!
    Last edited by francolin; 12-07-2018 at 7:22 AM.
Page 1
    • fisherjim
    • By fisherjim 12th Jul 18, 8:10 AM
    • 3,289 Posts
    • 5,062 Thanks
    fisherjim
    • #2
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:10 AM
    • #2
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:10 AM
    So to sum up; you went to get money to spend in their store and fell for the 10 good will gesture?


    That's about the amount Iceland would have had to pay them to cancel it so basically you still paid scammers, and Iceland fobbed you off and cost you money.

    If the not leaving site was so detrimental to their profitability how come some muppet allowed you to do it, and just put an invoice on your vehicle?

    Since the boss of a PPC was ordered by a judge to court and bring his toothbrush over this scam no one has tried it since.

    I'm glad though it worked to your satisfaction, and you spread the word about these scammers, had you come here first you would have got help to pay them nothing.
    • Ralph-y
    • By Ralph-y 12th Jul 18, 8:11 AM
    • 2,862 Posts
    • 3,593 Thanks
    Ralph-y
    • #3
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:11 AM
    • #3
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:11 AM
    Hi, and welcome to the forum ......


    you seam to be under the impression that this is all sort of just poor behaviour ... please watch then read the below



    https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

    ''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

    These are the exact words used, so you should quote them to your MP in a complaint and ask him/her to contact Sir Greg Knight MP if he wants further information about this scam.








    then for this PCN and future one's have a read of the newbies thread



    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4816822


    you will find much information to digest ....



    when done try forum searches for ' leaving the site '


    you will learn a lot .... 'mitigation of loss' is one ....



    when you have done some of the above you will be able to decide if to except the 10 bribe ..... I hope not ... but it depends on how you value your time .....



    keep on at Iceland ... let them know what MP's think of this scam (Hansard) look for and quote the 'do this again and I suggest you bring your toothbrush' quote from a judge to a solicitor re leaving the site cases!



    Ralph
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 12th Jul 18, 8:25 AM
    • 3,769 Posts
    • 6,189 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    • #4
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:25 AM
    • #4
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:25 AM
    had you come here first you would have got help to pay them nothing.
    She did come here first. She did get help which is why it is 10 and not 200. See the OP's other thread.
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 12th Jul 18, 8:26 AM
    • 3,769 Posts
    • 6,189 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    • #5
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:26 AM
    • #5
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:26 AM
    'mitigation of loss'
    You can't mitigate loss is there is no loss. It is a contractual amount paid on breach of a term supposedly clearly displayed.
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • francolin
    • By francolin 12th Jul 18, 8:31 AM
    • 17 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    francolin
    • #6
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:31 AM
    • #6
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:31 AM
    Thank you. I did come here initially, if you see my other thread (is it worth appealing this ticket). And I realise it's a fob off. I weighed up the pros and cons, and whilst I would have absolutley no problem defending this even if they decided to proceed with litigation, the registered keeper is a pensioner that has had several major operations. He wouldn't handle the stress of it well at all and there's always the risk of a having to attend a hearing. As sad as it is, I managed to make a lot of stress, headache and anxiety disappear for 10. And I also realise that that's basically one of their tactics. Unfortunately this time I thought it was the best option.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Jul 18, 8:32 AM
    • 20,271 Posts
    • 32,008 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #7
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:32 AM
    • #7
    • 12th Jul 18, 8:32 AM
    Why not get something for your 10 outlay and give both organisations a reason not to forget you. SAR-bomb them both. You can give them both plenty of questions to answer about how they are securely handling your data (including how Iceland acquired permission to use your email address for spamming you their offers!). SARs are free of charge now for the consumer, but they will cost the recipients considerably in terms of staff resource to answer them.

    Have a read here:

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5849784
    Please note, we are not a legal, residential or credit advice forum, rather one that helps motorists fight private parking charges, primarily at the 'front-end' of the process.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • fisherjim
    • By fisherjim 12th Jul 18, 9:17 AM
    • 3,289 Posts
    • 5,062 Thanks
    fisherjim
    • #8
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:17 AM
    • #8
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:17 AM
    She did come here first. She did get help which is why it is 10 and not 200. See the OP's other thread.
    Originally posted by IamEmanresu

    Would have helped if they were kept together on the same thread.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 12th Jul 18, 9:29 AM
    • 3,769 Posts
    • 6,189 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    • #9
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:29 AM
    • #9
    • 12th Jul 18, 9:29 AM
    Would have helped if they were kept together on the same thread.
    Wouldn't have made much difference as you were wrong in the first place. The "mitigation" issue was kicked into touch by Beavis. The VCS case is prior to the Supreme Court's enlightenment.

    In any case the toothbrush threat was all about contempt of court/abuse of process and not about "mitigation"
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • Castle
    • By Castle 12th Jul 18, 9:31 AM
    • 2,025 Posts
    • 2,729 Thanks
    Castle

    My advice to anyone using this store is to exercise extreme caution. Park, and get in. Don't wander off, even if it's for a reason that's perfectly consistent with normal commerce. Or even better, just don't use Iceland. I certainly won't be ever again (now that the cheeky sods have got my email address, they keep sending me offers). And if you do get a charge notice, don't take no for an answer and keep on pestering them.
    Originally posted by francolin
    You need to file a complaint with the ICO because that's is a breach of both the DPA/GDPR and regulation 22 of the PECR2003.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 12th Jul 18, 9:35 AM
    • 10,639 Posts
    • 10,480 Thanks
    The Deep
    Leaving site claims are very difficult to prove in court, especially if you left the site to obtain money to spend at the site. An MP has even questioned whether such a term in a contract breaches one's right to free movement under the Convention on Human Rights.

    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.
    Last edited by The Deep; 12-07-2018 at 9:39 AM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • fisherjim
    • By fisherjim 12th Jul 18, 9:50 AM
    • 3,289 Posts
    • 5,062 Thanks
    fisherjim
    Wouldn't have made much difference as you were wrong in the first place. The "mitigation" issue was kicked into touch by Beavis. The VCS case is prior to the Supreme Court's enlightenment.

    In any case the toothbrush threat was all about contempt of court/abuse of process and not about "mitigation"
    Originally posted by IamEmanresu



    About what? Not standing for a nonsensical leaving site scam, where a muppet hides and watches it?
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 12th Jul 18, 10:49 AM
    • 3,769 Posts
    • 6,189 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    About what?
    About the difference between a contractual charge and "mitigation of loss". You should know the difference by now and why that case is irrelevant.

    The only warning is the warning on the signs which is the responsibility of the driver to look for and the responsibility of the parking company not to hide.

    It's all explained in Beavis.
    If you want to win - avoid losing first. Here are a few examples
    1. Failing to Acknowledge or Defend https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5760415
    2. Template defences that say nothing https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5818671&page=5#86
    3. Forgetting about the Witness Statement
    • Ralph-y
    • By Ralph-y 12th Jul 18, 11:34 AM
    • 2,862 Posts
    • 3,593 Thanks
    Ralph-y
    the "mitigation of loss" I referred to was meant to be the duty of the PPC's agent to mitigate the loss by informing the customer not to leave the site



    appols for causing confusion ....


    Ralph
    • fisherjim
    • By fisherjim 12th Jul 18, 5:55 PM
    • 3,289 Posts
    • 5,062 Thanks
    fisherjim
    the "mitigation of loss" I referred to was meant to be the duty of the PPC's agent to mitigate the loss by informing the customer not to leave the site



    appols for causing confusion ....


    Ralph
    Originally posted by Ralph-y

    My point Exactly!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

854Posts Today

7,657Users online

Martin's Twitter