Hi
This has been asked many times im sure but I am not great on a computer and found the existing information about these MET people quite confusing.
I am the Keeper of the car and the driver at the time has expressly denied me the permission to use their name, which I agree with.
The driver mistakenly drove into the starbucks site in the middle of the night for 11 minutes, it took the driver this long to go to the signage and read it and come back to the vehicle and drive out, it was past midnight and as you can see by the the photos very dark. How on earth are you meant to accept terms whilst driving past a sign, which were barely visible anyway.
https://freeimage.host/i/fRDKVAQWould someone be kind enough to put in laymans terms what I am to do next please.
Im happy to cut and paste and alter things so my details can be put in the appeal.
I am a 66 year old pensioner who cant afford this charge for nothing, starbucks was closed anyway so we drove off.
Kind regards
Hi Mustek
Thanks for the very prompt reply and any help would be nice.
As requested here is the rear of the charge notice.
https://freeimage.host/i/fRbNy22Thanks again
G
There is no Keeper liability if the driver is not identified for the reason given above. Whilst you, as the named recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK) cannot be liable for the charge if the driver is not identified and you have even stated categorically that you were not the driver anyway, you will have to go through the appeals process or initial appeal, rejection, POPLA appeal, possible success. Anything beyond that we will cross that bridge if we ever come to it.
The simple fact is that MET have issued you a speculative invoice for an alleged brach of contract by the driver who is unknown to them. There is no legal obligation on you, the Keeper, to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking firm. Because the location is within the official Stansted Airport boundary, it is land that is covered by airport byelaws and therefore no "relevant land" for the purposes of PoFA 2012, which means that the Keeper cannot be liable for the charge if the driver is not identified.
For now, simply appeal with the following, only as the Keeper and come back for the POPLA appeal once they reject that:
I am the registered keeper. MET cannot hold a registered keeper liable for any alleged contravention on land that is under statutory control. As a matter of fact and law, MET will be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA provisions because Stansted Airport is not 'relevant land'.
If Stansted Airport wanted to hold owners or keepers liable under Airport Bylaws, that would be within the landowner's gift and another matter entirely. However, not only is that not pleaded, it is also not legally possible because MET is not the Airport owner and your 'parking charge' is not and never attempts to be a penalty. It is created for MET’s own profit (as opposed to a bylaws penalty that goes to the public purse) and MET has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. MET have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Thank you so much guys, would you say its best to do the appeal by post or email, I'm keen to give them as little information as possible. B789 thanks for taking the time to explain this to me and the links posted by Mustek were very informative.
You don/\'t use post for anything if you can help it. Use email or, for an appeal, you can use their portal if necessary.
After the appeal rejection, you cause these maps in your POPLA appeal to show that the location is within the Stansted Airport byelaws boundary.
Thank you I have used their portal for the appeal and used your wording as advised, and thanks for the map, this one is very clear, the others I have looked at have been blurred.
G
No point, it won’t make a difference.
MET know all about this, but all they want is your credit card number, so they simply ignore the inconvenient facts.
If you
do decide to contact them, be very sure not to identify the driver in any way. I wouldn’t bother.
For now, simply appeal with the following, only as the Keeper and come back for the POPLA appeal once they reject that:
You’ll get a POPLA code in due course.
I'd email the following response to them:
Subject: PCN [XXXXXXXX] – Kindly Escalate to a Responsible Adult
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am the registered keeper.
Your latest correspondence would benefit from being reviewed by a responsible adult within your organisation who is capable of comprehending a simple geographical and legal fact.
The location you describe as “Southgate Park (Starbucks)” is within the Stansted Airport boundary and is subject to Stansted Airport byelaws. As such, it is not relevant land for the purposes of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. This is not a matter of opinion, nor is it altered by creative wording on your paperwork.
Your continued insistence that PoFA applies is therefore demonstrably false and constitutes a clear breach of Section 8.1.1(d) of the Private Parking Single Code of Practice, namely making misleading statements about keeper liability where no such liability exists. That breach also places you in breach of your KADOE contract. This misuse of keeper data is being reported to the DVLA irrespective of whether you choose to persist with this fiction.
Your apparent belief that leasing arrangements involving Tabacon 2 Stansted Ltd somehow revoke statutory control is legally illiterate. A private lease does not extinguish byelaws. Statutory control remains exactly that: statutory.
You are fully aware that land governed by airport byelaws cannot engage keeper liability under PoFA. You are also fully aware that your parking charge is not a byelaws penalty, does not go to the public purse, and is instead a speculative invoice based on an alleged contract with an unidentified driver only.
The driver will not be identified.
If you decline to cancel this charge now, you are invited to waste further time and money by issuing a POPLA code so that this matter can be disposed of decisively. The evidence held by the Keeper — including definitive boundary mapping — will not change, and the outcome will not change.
This is your opportunity to end a process that is already fatally flawed.
Yours faithfully,
[Name]
Registered Keeper
Thanks for the continued advise guys
G
I am the Keeper of the car and the driver at the time has expressly denied me the permission to use their name, which I agree with.
You're getting good advice and if you follow it you won't pay a penny, but just for anyone else reading this thread, you don't need permission from the driver to name them.
(in legal terms, obviously. If (for example) you're married to them and they say 'name me and i'll divorce you' that's a different story)
But if you've fallen out with the driver and want to throw them under the bus, then you can name them to the company without their permission.
The POPLA appeal I provided in the thread linked to by
@jfollows is everything you need for your own. Use it.
Funny x 1
View List
Agree x 1
View List
Like x 1
View List