Is this parking charge considered excessive?

[mangos]

I was on holiday in the UK 2 weeks ago, parked briefly in an empty harbour side carpark in a quiet area. Didn't spot any signs or pay machines and assumed it was free. It was late afternoon and after dusk.

Ive come home today to a parking charge notice from a company called Civil Enforcement Ltd in Liverpool.

It is £100 or £60 if paid within 14 days. The notice is dated 7th December so I would have until 21st to pay it.

Fair enough, I've not paid to park as I missed the signs, probably because I am not familiar with the area, and explains why the car park might have been quiet. I would expect to pay £30 and be done with it.

Would you consider this an excessive fine and is there any change at negotiating with the parking company?

Having looked up the car park on google, the long list of reviews tell me that this is a common occurrence recently as the car park was only taken over by this firm at the beginning of the year so has stung holiday makers and locals.

[kiethton]

Personally I’d file the letter somewhere and forget about it, likewise any chasers (which are likely to get ever more theatening and may come from their internal “solicitors” in time). I’d only only return to the letter in the very unlikely event (0.01% chance) they issue court proceedings, at which time you’d be able to defend any claim with a variety of defences.

[mangos]

kiethton said:

Personally I’d file the letter somewhere and forget about it, likewise any chasers (which are likely to get ever more theatening and may come from their internal “solicitors” in time). I’d only only return to the letter in the very unlikely event (0.01% chance) they issue court proceedings, at which time you’d be able to defend any claim with a variety of defences.

Thank you. I am a little nervous to do so as having searched the company name a lot of hits come back with people having ended up with CCJ's.

I also dont want to end up paying the full £100 fine if I can get away with £60, although £60 I could do without this time of year.

[mangos]

Is it still true that these parking companies can only fine the driver and not the keeper?

Officially, I wasn't the driver on the day, but legislation might have changed since 2015 when that seems to have been a way of appealing...

[surveyor_101]

mangos said:

Is it still true that these parking companies can only fine the driver and not the keeper?

Officially, I wasn't the driver on the day, but legislation might have changed since 2015 when that seems to have been a way of appealing...

Depends if they can achieve keeper liability under POFA 2012, which most don't and couldn't run a bath.

As you have said £100 may well be deemed excessive as they cannot fine/penalise you its just a reasonable recovery of losses.As said £25 is the max of there loses I expect and £5 admin for the letter, they will have paid £2.50 for your dvla data.


Was the carpark permit only or was it pay and display?


What exactly are they saying you have breached if no terms are displayed?

I would write using BPA TEMPLATE as CE LTD are BPA members from MSE forum.



Re PCN number:

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner and to my MP.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require ALL photos taken and an explanation of the allegation and your evidence, i.e.:

- If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

- If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner. If you fail to evidence the actual grace period that applies at this site or suggest that only one period applies, this will be disregarded as an attempt to mislead. In the absence of evidence, it will be reasonably taken to be a minimum of twenty minutes (ten on arrival and ten after parking time) in accordance with the official BPA article by Kelvin Reynolds about 'observation periods' on arrival being additional and separate to a 'grace period' at the end.

- in all cases, you must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date.

Formal note:
Should you later pursue this charge by way of litigation, note that service of any legal documents by email is expressly disallowed and you are not entitled to assume that the data in this dispute/appeal remains the current address for service in the future.

Yours faithfully,

[surveyor_101]

mangos said:

Thank you. I am a little nervous to do so as having searched the company name a lot of hits come back with people having ended up with CCJ's.

I also dont want to end up paying the full £100 fine if I can get away with £60, although £60 I could do without this time of year.

Thats folk who follow the old advice to ignore.

Since Beavis VS Parking Eye that advice is wrong. You must respond and show them you will defend this predatory behaviour.

• Also worth noting that you don't consent for them to pass your data to 3rd parties. I have had a debt collector get mobile from one firm and they were calling me. The lady I spoke to said they got my mobile from the parking company appeal I made. I don't remember giving them it. They only texted me. The only case I have had where the landowner wouldn't cave and they claimed I overstayed my paid period by 18 mins in a pay and display! Also they started my parking session while I was on public highway outside the site!!!! The landowner a cricket club will have none of it and say their parking company assure them its a water tight case!

[S11Steve]

mangos said:

Is it still true that these parking companies can only fine the driver and not the keeper?

Officially, I wasn't the driver on the day, but legislation might have changed since 2015 when that seems to have been a way of appealing...

That changed in 2012, so they can try to hold the keeper liable if they meet certain requirements - CEL don't, but they are litigious and don't care much for the nuances of the correct legal process.
That said, they are part of the BPA trade association, so you do have access to the slightly better appeals system of POPLA.

The charge isn't excessive, sadly, - there was a supreme court case a few years back that ruled it is commercially justifiable.

The main questions are -
Who is the registered keeper of the vehicle?
Where did it occur?
Did you get a windscreen ticket?
Are you a UK resident?


CEL are one of the companies who have tried to take my company to court a few times, but withdraw once a defence is submitted. They're definitely at the lower end of the industry.

[surveyor_101]

S11Steve said:

That changed in 2012, so they can try to hold the keeper liable if they meet certain requirements - CEL don't, but they are litigious and don't care much for the nuances of the correct legal process.
That said, they are part of the BPA trade association, so you do have access to the slightly better appeals system of POPLA.

The charge isn't excessive, sadly, - there was a supreme court case a few years back that ruled it is commercially justifiable.

The main questions are -
Who is the registered keeper of the vehicle?
Where did it occur?
Did you get a windscreen ticket?
Are you a UK resident?




CEL are one of the companies who have tried to take my company to court a few times, but withdraw once a defence is submitted. They're definitely at the lower end of the industry.

The END GAME is never court as they don't want the expense its just a battle of wills when they realise they can't bully you they pull out and cut their losses


As for the charge the Beavis case dealth with a long overstay in a free carpark. If this is P&D I am not sure you could argue the £100 is commercially justifable. Also the OP missing the signs and would they pass the large letter test applied in the beavis case?

[S11Steve]

surveyor_101 said:

The END GAME is never court as they don't want the expense its just a battle of wills when they realise they can't bully you they pull out and cut their losses

To a degree, but they are also keen to get default judgements from people who ignore all correspondence because Martin Lewis said so on Facebook.

[mangos]

Having looked online I have found out that the car park is £4.50 a day fixed charge.

It is ANPR controlled so not too sure if it is one you just have to register your number plate with or if you display a ticket.

I didn’t get a windscreen fine.

The letter today is the first I knew of it.

I have all the parking apps so anytime I park somewhere I just use one of those so I’m just an idiot this time round it seems.

If I can’t negotiate a cheaper fine on the basis this is excessive then I may as well pay the £60. It’s my mistake, maybe I should have looked harder

[S11Steve]

You mentioned that you were on holiday in the UK - where are you resident?
And where did the letter go to?


Ultimately it is your choice whether to pay the £60 if your time is more valuable, but it's like throwing a chip to a seagull - it only encourages more of them!

[mangos]

S11Steve said:

You mentioned that you were on holiday in the UK - where are you resident?
And where did the letter go to?


Ultimately it is your choice whether to pay the £60 if your time is more valuable, but it's like throwing a chip to a seagull - it only encourages more of them!

I live in the uk too, the letter came to my home

[surveyor_101]

S11Steve said:

To a degree, but they are also keen to get default judgements from people who ignore all correspondence because Martin Lewis said so on Facebook.

Yes but in the case referenced they had not been ignored, they just chose to keep the poker face going.


I think some firms have actively done this in old cases as they don't make any attempt to find out if their 3, 4, 5 year old data is current.

[surveyor_101]

mangos said:

I live in the uk too, the letter came to my home

If you missed the signage then it may well not be good enough!

I would say don't pay and appeal if you feed these rats they just become more of a pest.

£100 verse £4.50 doesn't seem right to me, they may have crap signage because the fines are alot more lucrative than 4.50 a day parking!

[Pica-Pica]

S11Steve said:

You mentioned that you were on holiday in the UK - where are you resident?
And where did the letter go to?


Ultimately it is your choice whether to pay the £60 if your time is more valuable, but it's like throwing a chip to a seagull - it only encourages more of them!

Throwing chips to seagulls can be up to £1000 fine.

[S11Steve]

Where did it happen? Not Southampton Quay by any chance?

[mangos]

S11Steve said:

Where did it happen? Not Southampton Quay by any chance?

Wells next the sea quay parking

[S11Steve]

Ok - it's a well known location to us.




'Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your parking charge notice ref Number xxxxxxx

I wish to appeal as The Keeper of the vehicle on the basis that the documentation is not compliant with POFA 2012 in order to hold me liable as Keeper. The parking charge is not clear whether you consider the the driver or keeper liable for the alleged breach.

Please provide a POPLA authorisation code by return

love n kisses,

Mr Mangos"


When they supply a code, there are plenty of examples of POPLA appeals for keeper liability against Civil Enforcement, a few minutes copy, pasting and editing details to your circumstances will see it overturned at POPLA

[mangos]

S11Steve said:

Ok - it's a well known location to us.




'Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your parking charge notice ref Number xxxxxxx

I wish to appeal as The Keeper of the vehicle on the basis that the documentation is not compliant with POFA 2012 in order to hold me liable as Keeper. The parking charge is not clear whether you consider the the driver or keeper liable for the alleged breach.

Please provide a POPLA authorisation code by return

love n kisses,

Mr Mangos"


When they supply a code, there are plenty of examples of POPLA appeals for keeper liability against Civil Enforcement, a few minutes copy, pasting and editing details to your circumstances will see it overturned at POPLA

Wow thanks! Amazingly helpful!

Have you been there yourself then?
If so am I right that the signs aren’t easy to spot?

[S11Steve]

mangos said:

Wow thanks! Amazingly helpful!

Have you been there yourself then?
If so am I right that the signs aren’t easy to spot?

I manage a large fleet - we get thousands of these every year.

I've looked at it on Street view and it looks like there's only 2 or 3 machines for a 1500 capacity site, but I agree there's not many signs alive the place either.