Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: garym on May 03, 2024, 11:14:28 am
-
That's as maybe. However, on the balance of probabilities, which the judge can use to determine disputed facts, it could have gone against the defendant had it progressed to court.
I am not accusing you of doing anything wrong. Just that you have to be very careful how you word appeals if you are depending on no keeper liability. Next time, you will be aware of this.
-
The above doesn't state I was driving the car, nor the van - just that I was the keeper of the car (which they know) and that I hired a van from the invoice. I didn't state that I drove the car nor the van - I might not have gone to the car park at all and hired it for someone else.
-
I got an email Friday stating that TPS, as a gesture of goodwill, have dropped the charge and nothing further is required from my part.
The jist of the appeal was:
I have received a PCN as the registered keeper of the vehicle which has been reported by yourselves as overstaying the permitted parking period on <dates/times>.
During this period, I had rented a van from Hertz 24/7 (invoice attached) which corresponds to the aforementioned times/date. I have since contacted Hertz regarding this issue and awaiting their reponse, however given that the Hertz vehicles will not incur charges for overstaying the permitted period, I was under the impression that this would be extended to their customers.
Luckily for you, they cancelled the PCN. Had it not been so, your appeal would have made you liable as the driver. It is a classic example of how not to inadvertently give away the drivers identity when appealing as the keeper. A lesson learnt for the future.
-
Sorry, I don't have the exact wording - it was a web form to complete and I forgot to scrape it.
I got an email Friday stating that TPS, as a gesture of goodwill, have dropped the charge and nothing further is required from my part.
The jist of the appeal was:
I have received a PCN as the registered keeper of the vehicle which has been reported by yourselves as overstaying the permitted parking period on <dates/times>.
During this period, I had rented a van from Hertz 24/7 (invoice attached) which corresponds to the aforementioned times/date. I have since contacted Hertz regarding this issue and awaiting their reponse, however given that the Hertz vehicles will not incur charges for overstaying the permitted period, I was under the impression that this would be extended to their customers.
Please advise on next course of action etc. etc.
Thanks for those who replied to assist on this - I won't use that car park again (will choose Ikea next time!!).
-
Can you show us the exact wording of your appeal please.
-
I've appealed and contacted Hertz customer support - thanks for the info/advice and will update when I hear anything.
-
When I called Hertz,
You need to conduct matters in writing.
Put the issues to Hertz head office including:
You hired a van for **** hours/days from their branch in ****;
You parked adjacent to their offices in a car park which also serves B&Q and ** and in which *** Hertz vehicles were similarly parked;
When you returned their vehicle you parked this in the same car park, completed their paperwork and left in your car;
*** days later you received a parking charge notice from TPS alleging that you breached the parking conditions in the car park and requiring payment of ***.
The breach was that you parked your personal vehicle in excess of the maximum period allowed of 3 hours.
You raised the issue with staff at the on-site office who were unable to resolve the clear conflict between ***'s claim upon a bona fide Hertz customer and Hertz's business which rents vehicles for periods of up to ** weeks. The only bright side in this issue is that you are glad that you did not hire a vehicle for an extended period because apparently TPS's charge of £100 applies per day.
You have 'appealed' to TPS stating that you were a customer of Hertz and had their implied permission to park you car. You have provided proof to this effect. You hope that this is the end of the matter with TPS, but in any event you feel compelled to write to Hertz.
There is no warning given by Hertz either during the booking or collection process that customers' own vehicles may only be left on site for a maximum of 3 hours. You do not know whether this is an oversight or the company are intentionally disguising this limiting condition which, if known to customers at the booking stage, would fundamentally undermine Hertz's operations at the site. But whatever the reason, you would hope that in their response Hertz would confirm that they have reviewed booking and parking arrangements for this site and made the necessary changes to ensure that, in as much as they apply, customers are fully aware of any restrictions and action which they should take should they be served with a parking charge notice in error.
Just some thoughts.
-
GSV suggests that there are two distinct parts of the car park. Could it be that one side is for B&Q and the other for Hertz?
As mentioned, there is a smaller car park prior to the initial sign for B&Q which is for Burger King - this might be the 2nd part GSV suggests (there is a turn off before the main B&Q car park)
-
Above is correct, the whole car park is for B&Q including the section with the Hertz vans.
When I called Hertz, they didn't really answer any of my questions (do you have an agreement with TPS, how do you deal with vans being left in the car park for an extended time) - they said to speak to TPS who said to appeal with as much information as possible.
Which leads me to my original question, should I just show the van booking and appeal based on swapping a car for the van (although being careful not to state who was the driver)?
Max stay time is 3 hours - no option or facility to pay for the extended period.
-
Not wishing to speak on the OP's behalf, but as I've visited that B&Q frequently... Unless it's changed recently, aside from a small section for the adjacent Burger King, it's one large car park with uniform terms. I've certainly never noticed a section reserved solely for Hertz. That said, the OP can confirm as I've not been for a couple of months.
-
Thanks for the info.
So, breaking this down further:
Elapsed time on PCN - 228 minutes
Alleged breach - Vehicle exceeded the maximum stay time.
What does this mean?
What was the 'maximum stay time'?
Was payment required or an option to extend time on site beyond a free option?
GSV suggests that there are two distinct parts of the car park. Could it be that one side is for B&Q and the other for Hertz?
Is any part of the area reserved to Hertz customers?
If not, how the hell do Hertz operate? Do they expect hirers to limit their hire period to the maximum stay time or what?
-
Thanks for the reply and information
How high up the Hertz management food chain did you go with your request to have them get this cancelled?
Not very high and realistically (if Hertz provided a better service), they would have a process in place for anyone hiring over a certain time to register a vehicle to avoid any fines. I assume Hertz don't receive fines for parking their vans for a substantial amount of time.
I will try again with Hertz and see if I can speak to someone with higher authority.
-
As they are BPA member, you should appeal only as the keeper, not the driver. There is a technical flaw in the NtK that makes it non-compliant with PoFA in that it fails to "invite the keeper" to pay the charge as per 9(2)(e)(i).
Whilst TPS are unlikely to agree, you could try and lead a POPLA assessor by the nose to this fact. That and the fact that there are no signs immediately in the are you parked at and all the other POPLA appeal points used such as landowner authority etc.
How high up the Hertz management food chain did you go with your request to have them get this cancelled?
-
Images of signs - 1 on the way in (white) and a notices in the car park (https://imgur.com/a/q4s2UGn)
Also added a map of their location along with the van hire area in a green box
No exemption for Hertz rentals and the signs state parking for B&Q customers only
-
I'm reading it that the OP drove into the parking area and parked, hired the van and drove out in the van, later that day they drove back into the parking area with the van, returned it to the hire company and got back in their car and drove out again.
So the van is just incidental as to why they were in and parked up in the parking area.
They then got the ticket for their own car for being parked for an period in the carpark beyond whatever free time is granted to parkers.
That's how I see what actually happened anyway - I stand to be corrected!
-
Sorry, I didn't it make this very clear.
Hertz 24/7 offer van hire collection from various car parks - one of then being B&Q.
I hired a van using their service and following on from this hire, I received a PCN for the car (not van) registered in my name which used the car park and allegedly exceeded the maximum stay time.
Hope that makes more sense.
I will check out the signage and post back.
-
The car registered in my name received a PCN from TPS while hiring a van from Hertz 24/7 van hire.
Sorry OP, I can't follow this.
Are you saying that the vehicle whose details appear in the PCN is registered to you? In which case, what have Hertz got to do with the issue? Or that a vehicle on hire from Hertz is the subject of the PCN, in which case the PCN isn't addressed to you, is it?
-
Before sending any appeal I think we could do with some further information. That B&Q is fairly local to me - for the benefit of others, the Hertz Van Hire is based in the B&Q, hence the references to B&Q on the PCN.
The allegation is that your car exceeded the maximum allowed stay in the car park, thus leaving the driver liable to pay a parking charge. Do the signs* in the car park offer any exemption from this maximum stay for those who are renting a van and want to leave their car at the premises whilst they do so? If the signs do not mention any exemption, did Hertz offer any such exemption? If so, how was this communicated?
*It would also be useful to see photos of these signs, both their content and their placement/prominence.
-
Hi,
The car registered in my name received a PCN from TPS while hiring a van from Hertz 24/7 van hire.
I have spoken to Hertz who (were a little useless) said to speak to the parking fine people - so I called up TPS who said to appeal with as much information as possible.
I was about to complete the web form and attach the invoice for the van hire however thought I would ask for any advice on how to word this before appealing?
Here is the notice (https://imgur.com/a/BEiOUF3)
Thanks in advance!