Private Parking Company PCN information

83

By Jamesm1968

Parking Charge Notices v. Penalty Charge Notices

This hub is a guide to what to do if you receive a Parking Charge Notice. These are issued by Private Parking Companies such as 'Excel', 'G24', 'MET Parking' etc. to vehicles parked in private car parks.
They should not be confused with Penalty Charge Notices issued by Local Authorities.

If you receive a PCN from your Local Authority, you should be aware that these ARE legally enforceable, and you may end up in Court if you fail to either pay or lodge an appeal. On the other hand, a PCN issued by a PPC is NOT legally enforceable (despite what they may tell you). PPC's know this, but rely on the fear-factor to scare people into paying.

Parking Charge Notice paperwork

PCN's are issued in 2 ways. The first way is via a 'ticket' on the screen (just like a Council-employed Civil Enforcement Officer would do), and the second (and most controversial) is via the post to the vehicles' registered keeper.

A lot of PPC's like to issue 'tickets' via the post, especially when using ANPR technology to log vehicle movements on and off their contracted sites. The reason being that if a driver visits the same site twice within a short time, they can 'edit-out' the log of the vehicle leaving after the first visit, and entering on the second visit, thus making it seam that the vehicle has 'overstayed the maximum allowed time'.

It is also common practice to produce 'tickets' that resemble the official PCN's issued by Local Authorities. PPC PCN's that bear a resemblance to those issued by L/A's are issued in breach of 'The Administration of Justice Act 1970, Sec. 40, s/sec. D' (see below), and as such, can be handed to the Police as evidence.

Do I have to pay a PPC PCN?

Absolutely not. The only recourse for a PPC in Court would be a charge of trespass. The Court could only award damages equivalent to the financial loss caused by the damage to the property caused by you. They would also have to prove you had no right of access.

Given that, as a shopper, you would be using the store's car park, a Court would deem that you did have a right to enter and use the car park provided, thus rendering the charge of trespass un-enforceable.

PCN's issued for parking in Disabled/Parent & Toddler Bays are also unenforceable. This being due to the fact that in private car parks neither type of bay has any legal existence, and is provided purely as a courtesy. As an aside, there is a debate raging at the moment as to whether the requirement to display Blue Badges when parked in L/A owned car park Disabled Bays (which ARE legally protected) actually breaches the DDA itself, as it discriminates against those with temporary disabilities who do not qualify for Blue Badges.

It is worth noting that if a carpark is 'free for 2 hours', but there is no means to pay for further parking, then the maximum sum a PPC could be awarded in Court (should it go that far) is £0.00. However, if the carpark is a Pay and Display carpark, then the costs awarded would have to reflect the lost revenue from using the carpark without paying.

Do the PPC's accept appeals?

All PPC's have appeals procedures. These are normally based around the 'open letter, transfer name/address/PCN no. to template appeal rejection letter, send-out rejection letter' system.

In short, any appeal letter will automatically generate a 'cough-up or else' response.

What can I expect from a PPC?

It is not uncommon for a PPC to send a series of letters threatening to -

  • Obtain a CCJ - They can't do this, as it is not a criminal matter
  • Seize the vehicle - Again, not a legal option
  • Send the Bailiffs round - As above

A PPC will have gone to a lot of trouble to locate the vehicles registered keeper in order to issue an invoice for whatever amount they feel they can get away with charging you.

The best advice (backed-up by a motoring Lawyer on BBC's Watchdog program (see useful links below)) is to simply ignore any correspondence from the PPC. Do NOT communicate with them in any way whatsoever.

Some PPC's will send you Court papers as a last resort. If you receive such a Court summons, give the Court a quick call just to check if it is genuine. This is because some PPC's have been known to use a template Court summons on which they simply alter the date and defendants details whilst keeping the same court number etc. However, it has also been known for a PPC to actually send a real court summons in the hope that the defendant treats it as a fake, and fails to turn-up in court, thus, the PPC will win by default.

It is not uncommon for a PPC to send up to 7 letters before passing-it on to a debt recovery agency (usually but not always, owned by the same directors as the PPC). These will resort to such tactics as sending people to your door posing as Debt Collectors (These, unlike Court appointed Ballifs, have no right of access across your threshold).

Some of the PPC's use a Solicitor named 'Graham White' (no connection with 'Graham White and Co., a highly respected firm of Solicitors). This Solicitor threatens court action, but has never taken anyone to court. He also uses the name 'Roxburghe Parking'.

What if the Court Summons is genuine?.

If you unlucky enough to receive a genuine Court Summons, then you MUST defend yourself. There is plenty of genuine help available on the internet. The best sites for info on all things motoring are listed in 'Useful Links'.


How do they get your details ?.

PPC's usually contact DVLA and pay the princely sum of £2.80. In return, DVLA will send them the details of the registered keeper (who may not actually be the person who drove the car into the carpark). It is thought (but yet to be proven) that DVLA may well be in breach of the Data Protection Act as it is unclear as to whether or not they are exempt from Section 10 of the Act.

DVLA have declared that, by simply sending-in a signed V5 when registering a vehicle, the registrant has given them the required authourisation to sell-on your details to anyone who wants them.

There is a petition online calling for a change in the Law to require DVLA to obtain a signed form authourising them to release said details (see Links below).

At the moment, the registered keeper is not obliged to release details of the person driving at the time of the parking 'infringement', however, the forthcoming 'Freedom Bill' removes this protection with Section's 4 and 56 giving the most concern as they make the registered keeper responsible. Of course, there is a way around this, just register the vehicle in the name of a made-up person. A non-existant being cannot be taken to court.

There are petitions against both S4 and S56 of the Act and links will be added shortly.

Other ways used to obtain evidence are by trawling motoring forums (and even troll-posting on them) or by obtaining copies of print/audio/video media in which a person has complained about the invoice they got for just simply turning-round in the carpark. Such public admissions are like finding the Holy Grail to these guys. If you do go to the press, at least make sure to use a false name and DO NOT let the press take your photo. The less 'evidence' you give linking yourself to the 'offence', the harder it is for them to build a case.

I've already paid, what can I do now ?.

If you have already paid, you can claim your money back. You need to follow these rules -

  1. First off, send both the PPCand the landowner what is known as a 'Letter of intended action'. This will give them a set time-period in which to pay you back your money along with expenses. This needs to go by 1st Class Recorded Delivery.
  2. Once the date given in the letter of intended action has expired and, assuming they have not paid-up, you need to begin Court action. This is easier than it appears. It can all be done online at 'MoneyClaimOnline'. The cost is £90, but this can be added to your expenses.
  3. If they decide to still not pay and it gets to Court, make sure you turn up, if you don't, you will lose by default.

Why take action against the landowner as well as the PPC ?. Well, most PPCs own little or no assets, preferring instead to rent their computers and vehicles from a parent company. They are then free to collect as many CCJs as they wish without the Court Bailiffs being able to seize any tangible assets to sell.

It is not unusual for a PPC to liquidate their company and reform it under a slightly different name in order to avoid paying CCJs.

A landowner on the other hand, will be very likely to have tangible assets that the Bailiffs can seize to cover the amount claimed, so they are highly likely to pay-up. If enough people take them to Court, they may even sack the PPC and stop harrassing motorists.

Interesting snippets.

Aintree NHS Trust and Trethowans.

In the Tax year 2010/11, Aintree NHS Trust used Trethowans to chase and recover £8,500 of un-paid parking 'invoices' at a cost to the trust of £160,000. In one case, the Judge through-out the claim, leaving the Trust open to a counter-claim for expenses incurred in defending the case. The legal cost to the trust - £1,600+. Was it worth it ?. Go figure.

ASDA and 'Town and Country Parking'.

Despite the fact that UK Civil Law permits that any claim for damages caused by trespass may not exceed the cost of rectifying the damage and pursuing the claim, ASDA answered a FOI request by stating that they split the profits made from the invoices issued with TCP and that they (ASDA) had actually donated £120,000 of this profit to charity. As they are barred by Law from making a profit on these parking invoices, how come they donated that much from the profits made on the parking operation?.

5 PPC operatives jailed

In the Midlands, 5 PPC operatives have been sent to jail for 'blackmail and extorting money with menaces'. Thats 5 down and a few hundred to go.

UKPC have a bad day in Court.

UKPC, a virilant PPC, had a bad day in Court today (10/04/12). They took the registered keeper of a car to Court for non-payment of a 'Parking Charge'. They lost. Interestingly, they had also taken the R/Ks spouse to Court over the SAME invoice and had lost that one as well. Hence then trying to pin their hopes on a 2nd case against the R/K. During the case, the Judge referred to the fine as an 'unenforceable penalty'.

Administration of Justice Act 1970.

This is the relevant section of the act.


                                                                      Part V 

                                                      Miscellaneous Provisions
40 Punishment for unlawful harassment of debtors.

(1) A person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under a contract, he-

(a)harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency or the manner or occasion of making any such demand, or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;

(b)falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;

(c)falsely represents himself to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment; or

(d)utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.

(2) A person may be guilty of an offence by virtue of subsection (1)(a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.

(3) Subsection (1)(a) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise permissible in law) for the purpose-

(a)of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or

(b)of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.

(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than £100, and on a second or subsequent conviction to a fine of not more than £400.

Parking in Rail Station car parks

Please be aware that in certain cases, a Railway Station car park may be patrolled by a PPC, but unless the car park in question is covered by byelaws laid-down in the 'Railway Act', the ticket is still non-enforceable.

Where the car park is covered by the 'Railway Act', then a PCN can be issued in accordance with Section 14 of said Act.

Not all Station car parks are covered by the Act. It is down to you as an individual to contact the station and find-out.

Acknowledgements

The following sites were used in the research of this Hubpage -

  1. www.moneysavingexpert.com - Motoring forum.
  2. www.pepipoo.com
  3. www.legislation.go.uk - Admin. of Justice Act 1970.

Jamesm1968 Hub Author 12 days ago

The FOI request was mentioned in a post on MSE. I feel that it was more likely to have been a question asked to their media dept. Whatever, ASDA admitted to have donated £150,000 to charity under their policy of donating 50% of the parking charge fees collected to charity.

This one statement is a full admission that they are breaking the law by making a profit on these unenforceable charges.

As my Hub states, the only thing they can sue for is trespass and the only legal remedy is the issuing of a fine equivalent to the damage caused by the trespasser. This can include legal costs but not any profit.

Dave Eyre 2 weeks ago

FOI requests are for public companies. ASDA have no reason to answer an FOI request.

Jamesm1968 Hub Author 5 weeks ago

The only way they can affect your credit rating is if they were to actually win in Court then you decide not to pay, so they go back to Court to obtain a CCJ.

So long as they don't do Court you are safe.

Even if they do do Court, you are likely to win on appeal anyway.

Jamesm1968 Hub Author 3 months ago

Mr Sorrell (the man behind 'Graham White Solicitors', and his company are well-known to the SRA. In fact, as they cannot make a final decision on his fate until they have investigated all complaints made against him, have closed the book and will no longer accept any more complaints. This is purely to prevent their investigation simply becoming open-ended and will at least allow them to complete their task.

Barry 4 months ago

Graham White Solicitors do not exist they ceased trading in November 2005 and are acting illegally roxburghe who are acting with them or are them I wouls advise contacting the FSA regarding this practice and your local trading standards.

Jamesm1968 Hub Author 8 months ago

Maggie, They cannot affect your credit rating. In order to obtain a CCJ, they would have to take you to Court, hope you don't turn-up (so they win by default) and then, if you were one of the 0.001% of people to actually lose (highly unlikely) you would have to still not pay them before any action can be taken to have the Court serve you with a CCJ.

maggie 8 months ago

Hi I have received parking notices from euro parks, roxburgh (uk)ltd and now from Graham white solicitors threatening court action .... I have ignored all of them but they are saying a decree which may affect my credit rating am I right to continue to ignore these letters?

terry abbott 9 months ago

i have been getting warning letters from a solicitors called graham white, was going to pay £108 today untill i read your imformation...thank you ...

Submit a Comment
Members and Guests

Sign in or sign up and post using a hubpages account.



    • No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked
    • Comments are not for promoting your Hubs or other sites

    Please wait working