Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Flipping heck !!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Flipping heck !!

    Yes , got done for a parking charge in a private car park.. It was down London and I entered a shopping area to drop a friend off at the chemist while I waited. Not familiar with the area I 'assumed' that there was free parking for the shops, for maybe an hour..We were 16 minutes, and they 'allow' you 11 minutes..so 5 minutes overstay.

    Anyway, cutting to the chase i appealed to POPLA and lost and LCP wanted 100, not the 50 discounted amount..plus they said if you appeal to POPLA and lose, the discount is withdrawn. Before the POPLA decision was informed I knew I was going to lose, they had all angles covered here, so I went to their online payment system, put in my PCN number and it said I owed 50...you can't enter your own amount so you can only pay what is says on their system, So I paid the 50 they said was due..

    Now, 2 weeks later LCP have written to me saying they want another 50, because the appeal to POPLA was lost and the discount no longer applies. Interestingly a week before this, I actually went into their payment system to see if I could just enter an amount and pay that, but it said 100 was owing so I didn't bother. Since then they have obviously changed the amount to 50, and now they're saying it should be 100.

    I'm sorely tempted to just tell them I've settled the account for the amount they said was owing, and that's that. Coming back and saying they want another 50 is not on, I paid what it said, in good faith, bla bla..

    Question is, if they take me to court, do I have a leg to stand on ? (I hear LCP are a bit aggressive...).

  • #2
    just spent an hour or so reading the Beavis judgement...Am just thinking that while 85 was seen as an acceptable amount in this case, and that LCP quote this case in their POPLA evidence...great play was made in the court about the fact Beavis enjoyed 2 hours of free parking, and that in this context 85 was reasonable..LCP offered no free parking, it was pay and display, and if you ran over it was 50 or 100. so in context of the Beavis judgement, doesn't LCP seem excessive ?

    Comment


    • #3
      Do you have a receipt or even better a screen shot of your payment? I would guess that if they tried to take you to court the fact that you paid the amount requested on the site would be a defence.
      I'm an official AAD Moderator and also a volunteer, here to help make the forum run smoothly. Any views or opinions are mine and not the official line of AAD. Similarly, any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional - Find a Solicitor or go to the National Probono Centre.

      If you spot an abusive or libellous post then please report it by Clicking Here. If you need to contact me, for instance if I've issued you a warning, moved, edited or deleted your post, please send me a message by clicking my username.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by cymruambyth View Post
        Do you have a receipt or even better a screen shot of your payment? I would guess that if they tried to take you to court the fact that you paid the amount requested on the site would be a defence.
        unfortunately not,but their system will show that there is no option other than to pay what it says on the screen, you can't delete or overwrite it. Hence is must have said 50 otherwise I wouldn't have been able to pay it. I can't prove it said 100 prior to that, but somewhere in their system will be a transaction that changed that.I have until 9th october to cough up the extra 50.

        LCP emailed me yesterday to say it said 50 because the POPLA appeal result hadn't been given yet. I have just been on to their payment screen and it says "payment already completed for this PCN, please contact us if you have any queries".

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by cardiac arrest View Post

          unfortunately not,but their system will show that there is no option other than to pay what it says on the screen, you can't delete or overwrite it. Hence is must have said 50 otherwise I wouldn't have been able to pay it. I can't prove it said 100 prior to that, but somewhere in their system will be a transaction that changed that.I have until 9th october to cough up the extra 50.

          LCP emailed me yesterday to say it said 50 because the POPLA appeal result hadn't been given yet. I have just been on to their payment screen and it says "payment already completed for this PCN, please contact us if you have any queries".
          Take a screenshot of that, it could be useful.

          It could be argued that it constitutes unfair practice to demand full payment simply because you appealed, when you had nevertheless already paid the 'discounted' amount within the allowed time.

          Might also be worth browsing this site, if you haven't already -
          http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Still Waving View Post

            Take a screenshot of that, it could be useful.

            It could be argued that it constitutes unfair practice to demand full payment simply because you appealed, when you had nevertheless already paid the 'discounted' amount within the allowed time.

            Might also be worth browsing this site, if you haven't already -
            http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla/
            thanks, yes i took a photo of it to show the date..They actually said they're demanding full payment because i lost the appeal (pretty obvious if I won I wouldn't pay anything). The fact I was allowed to pay the 50 by their system doesn't seem to convince them, they just said it was like that until the case appeal had been decided.. I'll have a read of your link..thank you for responding.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by cardiac arrest View Post

              thanks, yes i took a photo of it to show the date..They actually said they're demanding full payment because i lost the appeal (pretty obvious if I won I wouldn't pay anything). The fact I was allowed to pay the 50 by their system doesn't seem to convince them, they just said it was like that until the case appeal had been decided.. I'll have a read of your link..thank you for responding.
              Theirs doesn't sound like an argument that would stand up. You paid the correct amount within the discount period - in good faith, as 50 was the amount showing as payable at that time, and it was accepted by their website - pending the outcome of the appeal, to protect yourself against the heavier penalty. A very reasonable course of action. In a test of reasonableness, their stance seems weak.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Still Waving View Post

                Theirs doesn't sound like an argument that would stand up. You paid the correct amount within the discount period - in good faith, as 50 was the amount showing as payable at that time, and it was accepted by their website - pending the outcome of the appeal, to protect yourself against the heavier penalty. A very reasonable course of action. In a test of reasonableness, their stance seems weak.
                Thanks, when you put it like that it sounds better. I think the truth of it is that someone at LCP made an error in reducing it to 50 from 100. The discount period had expired and I had made an appeal to POPLA, so whatever outcome it could never be 50, only 100 or nothing.

                Aside from that though, I've read the link you gave me,and found the case Parking Eye v Carguis. Although this was judged prior to the Supreme Court case hearing the Beavis appeal, there does not seem to be anything new in the appeal to affect the Carguis decision. Carguis won his appeal against Parking Eye because the judge ruled that the Beavis case ruling was different circumstances. In Beavis there was a 2 hour free parking period, so parking eye only made it money from people not paying and thus the 85 was considered appropriate ..however Carguis had paid 4 for 4 hours, so parking Eye made regular income from charges and did not need to charge 100 for offenders.

                In my situation, LCP charge 8 for 4 hours and demand 100 for failing to comply. PE must make enough income from the parking meter not to need to apply 100non compliance fee, which in effect means it is a penalty charge, and unenforceable ...?? As I've paid 50 in 'good will', I reckon that's enough...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cardiac arrest View Post

                  Thanks, when you put it like that it sounds better. I think the truth of it is that someone at LCP made an error in reducing it to 50 from 100. The discount period had expired and I had made an appeal to POPLA, so whatever outcome it could never be 50, only 100 or nothing.
                  Oh, I must have misread your history of this.

                  Good luck with it - I hope you can persuade them to take a pragmatic view.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well I'm on the case now I've got my hackles up. Been on to Brent Council website to check planning permissions were sought for the signs...non found, going back to 1993..so I'm seeking guidance from a guy down there who works in the planning dept. I have a couple of examples where cases were won on this point. The second 'string to my bow' is the Parking Eye v Cargius case which counters the Beavis judgement where payment is made for parking, rather than a free period given. Not sure if this helps anyone else,but the parkingcowboys site has proved very informative..

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm wondering if I can demand a copy of the LCP submission to POPLA ? The POPLA web-site only lets you see the latest document, not the previous ones..as and when you progress through their process. When LCP replied to POPLA my earlier submission disappeared, and when POPLA replied to me the LCP submission then disappeared ...Is this deliberate obfuscation wonder ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        2 days on and not even an acknowledgement from POPLA nor Brent BC. As I'm working to a deadline here I sent a FOI to Brent to ask if the ANPR and the signs were approved or not. I can't do same to POPLA so I'll just keep badgering them.

                        i am not sure why POPLA seem to be reluctant to simply attach the notes and email them to me. Is there a way I can force them to do this?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Very good luck with this , take all the screenshots and photos you can ,hackles up I'd be livid xxx
                          if you do it today and you like it you can always do it again tomorrow


                          I'm an official AAD Moderator and also a volunteer, here to help make the forum run smoothly. Any views or opinions are mine and not the official line of AAD. Similarly, any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional - Find a Solicitor or go to the National Probono Centre.

                          If you spot an abusive or libellous post then please report it by Clicking Here. If you need to contact me, for instance if I've issued you a warning, moved, edited or deleted your post, please send me a message by clicking my username.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by nanna58 View Post
                            Very good luck with this , take all the screenshots and photos you can ,hackles up I'd be livid xxx
                            Thank you .... I've received 3 emails from POPLA this morning with all the LCP submissions attached..so that's all their justification for their existence. Also done some research on LCP, they have 5 London car parks and a holding company based in Lincolnshire, one shareholder and his wife and one other as 'employees' They paid a dividend of 58,000 last year (nice work eh?). Their accounts though are under the threshold for details, so just a summary balance sheet,not turnover (which is what I'm after). The point of this is to add some proportion to their claim that it takes 3 hours (at 32 p/hr) to process claims for 'non compliance' ..plus ancillary costs they say it costs them 110 to deal with non compliance (breach of contract). Given they are managed by 3 people and that the owner is also on the board of 20+ other companies, it's hardly a full time job it seems. Much of it is automated with their computer system. I want to add weight to my claim that their business is funded by the routine hourly parking charges they have at their 5 car parks, and not from fines. They charge 8 for 4 hours in their car parks..but really I want to see a profit and loss account but don't know where I can find this. Any ideas anybody ?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by cardiac arrest View Post

                              Thank you .... I've received 3 emails from POPLA this morning with all the LCP submissions attached..so that's all their justification for their existence. Also done some research on LCP, they have 5 London car parks and a holding company based in Lincolnshire, one shareholder and his wife and one other as 'employees' They paid a dividend of 58,000 last year (nice work eh?). Their accounts though are under the threshold for details, so just a summary balance sheet,not turnover (which is what I'm after). The point of this is to add some proportion to their claim that it takes 3 hours (at 32 p/hr) to process claims for 'non compliance' ..plus ancillary costs they say it costs them 110 to deal with non compliance (breach of contract). Given they are managed by 3 people and that the owner is also on the board of 20+ other companies, it's hardly a full time job it seems. Much of it is automated with their computer system. I want to add weight to my claim that their business is funded by the routine hourly parking charges they have at their 5 car parks, and not from fines. They charge 8 for 4 hours in their car parks..but really I want to see a profit and loss account but don't know where I can find this. Any ideas anybody ?
                              If they are a private limited company, I don't expect you can.

                              Comment

                              Who's Viewing Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
                              Who's Viewed Thread:
                              Working...
                              X