Author Topic: Debt Recovery Plus. UKPC. PCN-9225123247869. Parked for too long. Houndstone retail park, Yeovil, Somerset  (Read 1306 times)

0 Members and 77 Guests are viewing this topic.

The driver went on a trip to Devon and the car had some issues, went to a Halfords and managed to fix the issue with help over the phone from a mechanic who recommended not to drive the vehicle untill it was fixed. The driver then spent 4ish hours broken down in a car park (fixing the issue) that had a maximum stay of 3 hours.

The driver has not been driving for too long and wasn't aware of changing the vehicle's log book address and so the parking fine and follow up letters got sent to an old address and DRP have traced the driver's new address and have sent a final letter ordering payment of £170 for the pleasure of being broken down in a carpark in Yeovil.

One DRP phone agent suggested the driver may be able to appeal if they had receipts for a recovery service or a mechanic. But as they fixed it themselves they only have receipts from Halfords

According to DRP as this is the final notice the driver cannot appeal against this parking fine and the driver asked if hypothetically the driver was to not pay, where this could lead and was told it could be taken to court.

The driver and vehicle was in the car park for longer than the permitted time however the vehicle was not in a driveable condition untill it was fixed.

Should they just suck it up and pay DRP to save the aggro?

Is the driver fighting a losing battle?


[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


The driver has not been driving for too long and wasn't aware of changing the vehicle's log book address
It's not the driver who needs to change the vehicle's V5C, the registered keeper does, as it their name on the document. If they haven't already, they should do this immediately. It is also not the driver who UKPC are writing to, as they have no idea who was driving, it is the keeper.

Looking at the specifics of the case - the breakdown could give rise to a potential defence of 'frustration of contract' - an argument that the terms of the contract (i.e. to not stay more than 3 hours) could not be complied with due to a factor outside the driver's control, namely that the car broke down. How viable this argument is may depend on the circumstances. If they entered the car park knowing their car was faulty/about to break down, it might be more challenging to argue that this was outside of the driver's control.



Sorry for the confusion, the registered keeper has changed the vehicle's v5c since being notified of the error. Aswell as that it was the registered keeper who has received the debt recovery letter.

Onto the 'frustration of contract', the driver drove into the car park to top up on oil and over filled due to personal incompetence. The mechanic they called said that this could flood the engine if started and that it should be pumped out or drained before moving off. It was never the driver's intention to stay for longer than half an hour, let alone 4 hours.

Does this fit with 'frustration of contract'?

Onto the 'frustration of contract', the driver drove into the car park to top up on oil and over filled due to personal incompetence.
I'm not a lawyer, others may advise, but I fear this does not work in your favour. The event in question does seem to have happened after the contract was formed, but alas does seem to be caused by the driver, rather than being a factor outside the control of either party. The 'traditional' frustration of contract argument in parking cases tends to be things such as the driver returning to find his car unexpectedly won't start, or a flat tyre etc.