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.
private land parking fine - help needed.
Eastender
Posts: 135 Forumite
Hello folks,
Been going fairly regularly to a leisure center in London to play Badminton and there they introduced parking charge for up to 3 hours for a £1 pound about two years ago. We were told by leisure center reception staff that we can pay for the parking after our Badminton session, which is in the morning but has to be paid on the day. I have been doing that for the last two years without incurring any fines.
However, two months ago I received a fine through the post that they have a video evidence that I entered the car park of the leisure center and did not pay. I appealed and gave the evidence that I paid on exit and provided the evidence, as I registered on their website when I pay for the parking, which is Whoosh. They cancelled the fine.
Later I received another fine through the post again for another parking. I again appealed but received a reply today that they're not cancelling the fine as I did not pay first, according to their T&C, though they acknowledged, I did pay on the day and did not exceed my stay. They mention on the letter that I can appeal to POPLA but if I lose my appeal, then the full charge of £100 is payable!
I am baffled by this. If they want customers to pay first when they park, then why did they cancel my earlier fine? Also for the last two years I have been paying on exit and they did not bother to fine me. Do I have strong case when I appeal to POPLA?
Been going fairly regularly to a leisure center in London to play Badminton and there they introduced parking charge for up to 3 hours for a £1 pound about two years ago. We were told by leisure center reception staff that we can pay for the parking after our Badminton session, which is in the morning but has to be paid on the day. I have been doing that for the last two years without incurring any fines.
However, two months ago I received a fine through the post that they have a video evidence that I entered the car park of the leisure center and did not pay. I appealed and gave the evidence that I paid on exit and provided the evidence, as I registered on their website when I pay for the parking, which is Whoosh. They cancelled the fine.
Later I received another fine through the post again for another parking. I again appealed but received a reply today that they're not cancelling the fine as I did not pay first, according to their T&C, though they acknowledged, I did pay on the day and did not exceed my stay. They mention on the letter that I can appeal to POPLA but if I lose my appeal, then the full charge of £100 is payable!
I am baffled by this. If they want customers to pay first when they park, then why did they cancel my earlier fine? Also for the last two years I have been paying on exit and they did not bother to fine me. Do I have strong case when I appeal to POPLA?
0
Comments
-
I'm a bit of a 'newbie' to the wonderful world of parking charges myself but I'm pretty sure a strong, very strong, complaint to the landowner has an excellent chance of success in this instance. Assuming the car park is owned or leased by the Leisure Centre, you have years of customer loyalty to cite!
It all sounds absolutely barking. Ask to talk to the most senior person in the building and politely demand that they get this charge (it's not a fine - it's an invoice) cancelled ASAP. That is well within their remit. If they say they can't do it, don't believe them but press on!
Have you taken any action so far? You need to state the name of the parking company for maximum input.0 -
The name of the company as I mentioned, is Whoosh. I'm going to speak to the Leisure centre, who might wash their hands.0
-
The name of the company as I mentioned, is Whoosh. I'm going to speak to the Leisure centre, who might wash their hands.
if I ignore it what can they do?
the name of the PARKING COMPANY (PPC) is definitely not WHOOSH
IF YOU IGNORE IT the PPC can issue an MCOL with Northampton CCBC and take you to small claims court (civil court) to try to enforce their invoice
they have 6 years to do this0 -
The name of the company as I mentioned, is Whoosh. I'm going to speak to the Leisure centre, who might wash their hands.
if I ignore it what can they do?
But "whoosh" is a payment system they didn't issue the parking charge did they?
Have you read the nrwbies thread on here yet?0 -
The name of the company as I mentioned, is Whoosh. I'm going to speak to the Leisure centre, who might wash their hands.
Why might they wash their hands? The Leisure Centre has allowed a parking company to instigate an absolutely insane 'system' in their car park which traps and tries to extort money out of loyal, extremely loyal, customers who are doing their damndest to pay for parking. And to top it all they have given you misleading information!
Unless I'm missing something.0 -
The name of the parking company should be on the PCN you've received. It should also be on the car park signage though on an example I've seen online it is in quite small lettering.
You say you've appealed .... so presumably you did appeal to the parking company? Because you cannot appeal to Whoosh.0 -
The leisure centre will need to take ownership of this. If they have been accepting post-payment and issuing receipts, then they have been condoning the practice. They appoint the PPC and must instruct them to cancel charge.
Obviously from now on you should pay up front and the reception should refuse post payments unless they change the system with the PPC.
Don't hang around on this, but get the leisure centremanager to act pointing out their complicity in this.0 -
yes, I think the payment system is Whoosh but the parking company name is PCL - Parking Charge Ltd. and it says I can appeal to POPLA.
I don't understand, as I mentioned, all these months they had accepted parking on exit and now suddenly they show they state their T&C and issue me a fine that I did not pay on arrival.
Though I paid for the duration of my stay but did not pay up front, but we're told in the past by the Leisure Centre reception that we can pay later, after our activities but had to pay on the same day.
I will approach the Leisure centre but I'm not too hopeful and I don't go there now often. I have to prepare for the POPLA appeal.0 -
You will fail POPLA as they take a very limited view of things. They look at "the contract" you have with the PPC and if it says pay first, then the fact that the leisure centre have allowed a variation on this in the past is irrelevant.
Your best bet is involving the leisure centre, threatening to bring it to the attention of the local press (and Daily Mail!) - even better if there are more of you who have been hit.
If all that fails, I have given you the argument you can use to win in court as long as you can support this with paperwork and, hopefully, other gym members.0 -
"I don't understand, as I mentioned, all these months they had accepted parking on exit and now suddenly they show they state their T&C and issue me a fine that I did not pay on arrival."
that is because you live in the real world .... and not the unregulated world of 'private parking'
a read watch of the below will better help you to understand such.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill
and slightly longer, the committee stage
https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d5550515-cce9-4185-83ec-754dadb7524a
''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.
and some quotes from the committe stage
"The other area is hospital parking, and I want to single out one company for some pretty shady practices. That is ParkingEye"
" is very clear to me that there is collusion between parking companies and solicitors’ firms—so-called roboclaims companies. "
"They are often set up adjacently and involve the same directors and personnel. Incidentally, the same personnel get involved in the so-called appeals bodies."
"Essentially, it is a money-making enterprise that takes advantage of motorists up and down the country. They operate in a very business-like fashion, which is why I call them roboclaims companies."
"The companies are jamming up parts of our legal system."
“I now pretty much know exactly how the parking companies and in particular the IPC have been running this scam for the past 5 years. Basically both of the appeals processes are a complete and utter sham, (and part of that sham is Gladstones Solicitors itself)”
"The appeals process at Excel/VCS is run by a team of minimum wage office workers with no legal knowledge or experience whatsoever,"
" It is claimed by the head of the appeals service (retired Judge Bryn Holloway) that this is a completely independent fair process, it is not”
"The letter mentions two individuals—Will Hurley and Bryn Holloway—and concludes this is a typical example of the clear collusion between the IPC, their members and the IAS"
"what we can do about roboclaims companies and solicitors firms that profit, often in shady ways"
" the very large amounts of money that can be involved in such scams—a company called Smart Parking was involved in one such scam on my patch"
"tightening up the rules regarding the unfair use of automatic number plate recognition" "BW Legal, regularly issues 10,000 county court judgments a month, and is known to have issued 28,000 in one month"
"They are jamming up our court system, and are often totally unjustified."
" because the lifeblood of trying to extort money from people is having access to their details."
All from Parking (Code of Practice) Bill (First sitting) Hansard
"I will approach the Leisure centre but I'm not too hopeful and I don't go there now often."
you will have to be polite ... but forceful .... let the manager know all about what MPs's think .... if he still refuses then inform him/her that if it gets to court then they will become involved.
do you have written ....
" I again appealed but received a reply today that they're not cancelling the fine as I did not pay first, according to their T&C, though they acknowledged, I did pay on the day and did not exceed my stay." ?
Ralph0
This discussion has been closed.
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