• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum. Please register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
  • LegalBeagles® is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

**WON!!** Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • **WON!!** Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

    We were given a parking charge by UKPC when the car was parked at Millennium Retail Park, Greenwich, London at 15:19 on 25 November 2015. The charge was because the car was not parked within the markings of the bay or space.

    The charge was given to the driver on the windscreen and is £100 with a reduced charge of £60 if paid within 14 days.

    We took no action and on 29 December, a notice to keeper was sent through the post demanding the payment of £100.

    I appealed to UKPC on 9th January as the registered keeper and raised the usual challenge of signs not well displayed, charge is unreasonably high, the POFA (liability to keeper), who is the creditor, demanded the contract between UKPC and the landowner and the POPLA reference if the appeal is turned down.

    UKPC responded on 18th January with the attached letter claiming the Parking Charge was correctly issued and demanded a payment of £60 within 35 days and will raise the charge to £100 thereafter.

    I am now considering if it is worthwhile to appeal to POPLA given the precedence set by the Beavis case as it will be difficult to challenge UKPC based on GEPOL (is this a correct assumption ?)

    I have checked with DVLA and it appears that UKPC requested the keeper details on 24th December 2015 (so I presume it is difficult to challenge on the POFA schedule 4)

    The other challenge is to request to provide contractual details to substantiate their right to enter into contracts with the drivers. And this will only be successful if UKPC for whatever reason is not able to produce this evidence.

    So do I read it that the chance for POPLA to allow this appeal is slim.

    I know POPLA decision is not binding as far as the keeper is concerned.

    Then the next stage (if we choose not to accept the POPLA decision and pay the £100) we would need to deal with the debt collector letters from UKPC and also hope that they will not take us to court

    I am trying to weigh up the different options/scenarios :

    1. appeal to POPLA
    2. pay up now - without going to POPLA

    if we take up option 1, but fail to get a favourable reply from POPLA, then we need to decide if we should pay the £100 or just sit tight and deal with the torrents of debt collectors letters and the off chance of a court proceeding which could become very costly ...and slim chance of winning post Beavis ...(and this could be stressful ...)

    Any advice would be much appreciated ...!!!
    Attached Files
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

    That's what they like folk to believe. Just because GPEOL is out the window in some cases doesn't mean you'll lose. Keeper liability is huge too and lack of contract is also a decent weapon.

    According to popla, GPEOL cases are on hold until they consider the verdict. I think they're more concerned with the time needing to be specified and using Beavis as an excuse.

    Post up the notices.



    • #3
      Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

      so what should I do if want to appeal to POPLA ?


      • #4
        Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

        Give me the info so i can pick the useful screw ups apart.



        • #5
          Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

          Notice to driver:

          Parking Charge
          Ref: xxxxxxx
          Date: 25 November 2015
          Vehicle registration mark: XXXX
          Make: xxxx
          Colour: xxxx
          Location: Millennium Retail Park, Bugsby Way, Charlton, London SE10 0QJ
          Issue time: 15:19 25-11-2015
          Time first seen: 15:19 25-11-2015

          Parking attendant had reasonable cause to believe that the following breach of terms and conditions of parking occured on private land (details of which were clearly and prominently displayed and agreed to by the driver by the act of parking the vehicle):-
          Not parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space.

          A parking charge of £100 is outstanding & payable within 28 days of the date of this parking ticket. A reduced charge of £60.00 is payable if payment is received within 14 days of the date of this parking ticket. If payment is received within 14 days the reduced charge will be accepted in full settlement. Details of how to make payment are overleaf.

          Notice to keeper is attached.

          also a photo of the UKPC display at the car park.

          please let me know if you need anything else eg reply from DVLA re my request as to who access my details as registered keeper and when ...
          Attached Files


          • #6
            Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

            I'll have a better look at the weekend :okay:



            • #7
              Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

              Thank you, I suppose we have plenty of time to mount our defence .... :colbert:


              • #8
                Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

                Looking at your notice to keeper there would seem to be a few items missing that are required by POFA to hold the keeper liable. Items like period of parking. Look at pragraph 8 and see if everything that should be there is there.


                • #9
                  Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

                  as far as the notice to driver goes, thee is only time issued and time first seen ...

                  would that comply with the period of parking ... as in my case, it was not an overstay - rather it was not parking within the marked bay ... so is period of parking relevant and can I use this omission as a challenge ... you said a few things are missing - what else ?

                  Issue time: 15:19 25-11-2015
                  Time first seen: 15:19 25-11-2015


                  • #10
                    Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

                    I'll have a look tomorrow later on after work.



                    • #11
                      Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis





                      • #12
                        Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

                        UKPC often fail at POPLA due to failing show evidence of authority to manage the land, so throw that in.

                        Also, unlike the parkingeye signs in the Beavis case, which had the £85 charge in a huge font, I can't see where the £100 charge is at all on your sign. I would therefore put POPLA on the spot and use the Beavis case to your advantage.

                        ParkingEye v Beavis established that the penalty law is in play for parking charges and that a charge of £85 was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. It would not be a penalty or unfair consumer contract however if the charge was clearly brought to the attention of the motorist. In the Beavis case this was achieved by the £85 charge being in the largest font on the sign and in contrasting colours. I submit a copy as evidence.

                        (get one here http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...s-cp-plus.html)

                        In contrast the £100 charge here is buried in the small print. As ParkingEye v Beavis is binding case law I submit the charge must be found to be either a penalty or an unfair consumer charge. I refer to the following paragraphs of the judgment to support this.

                        Para 100: “The charge is prominently displayed in large letters at the entrance to the car park and at frequent intervals within it” and “They must regard the risk of having to pay £85 for overstaying as an acceptable price for the convenience of parking there.”

                        Para 108: “But although the terms, like all standard contracts, were presented to motorists on a take it or leave it basis, they could not have been briefer, simpler or more prominently proclaimed. If you park here and stay more than two hours, you will pay £85”

                        Para 199: “What matters is that a charge of the order of £85 (reducible on prompt payment) is an understandable ingredient of a scheme serving legitimate interests. Customers using the car park agree to the scheme by doing so.”

                        Para 205: “The requirement of good faith in this context is one of fair and open dealing. Openness requires that the terms should be expressed fully, clearly and legibly, containing no concealed pitfalls or traps. Appropriate prominence should be given to terms which might operate disadvantageously to the customer.”

                        Para 287: In so far as the criterion of unconscionableness allows the court to address considerations other than the size of the penalty in relation to the protected interest, the fact that motorists entering the car park were given ample warning of both the time limit of their licence and the amount of the charge also supports the view that the parking charge was not unconscionable


                        • #13
                          Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

                          the £100 is mentioned below the "Terms of Parking apply at all times" - it is certainly displayed with the biggest font size ...

                          probably the third size down with "5 hours maximum stay" being the largest, "Terms of parking apply at all times" second size down followed by the £100 parking charge.

                          More importantly, the conditions that need to be complied are of the smallest font size ...in this case "All vehicles must be parked only within marked bay"

                          so do we have case of complaint against the sizes of the display regarding the £100 and the conditions of the breach


                          • #14
                            Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

                            in my POPLA apeal, apart from appealing on the ground of :

                            1. keeper liability
                            2. No standing
                            3. signage

                            what about GEPOL - is it worth including ?


                            • #15
                              Re: Parking charge from UKPC post Beavis

                              :bump: for [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION] xx
                              Debt is like any other trap, easy enough to get into, but hard enough to get out of.

                              It doesn't matter where your journey begins, so long as you begin it...

                              recte agens confido


                              Any advice I provide is given without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

                              I can be emailed if you need my help loading pictures/documents to your thread. My email address is Kati@legalbeagles.info
                              But please include a link to your thread so I know who you are.

                              Specialist advice can be sought via our sister site JustBeagle


                              View our Terms and Conditions

                              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.

                              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.


                              No announcement yet.

                              Court Claim ?

                              Guides and Letters

                              upgrade to vip

                              Want exclusive access to forums, more privacy and a live chat box? Upgrade to become a bigger part of our community.

                              only £15/yr

                              Offers available. No subscription traps.

                              sign up now

                              Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

                              Find a Law Firm