Free Traffic Legal Advice

Well, this is a bit damning for Hertz:

Quote

FINES, TOLLS AND OTHER CHARGES

You are responsible for all fines, road tolls, congestion charges and other similar charges (including parking fines or charges) incurred in relation to the vehicle during your rental. Some of these will be sent to us for payment, which we will pay and recover from you by way of reimbursement. Alternatively, we may be required to provide your details to the relevant authority or other third party, who will contact you directly.

Section 16:

Quote

By signing this rental agreement I agree that while the rental agreement is in force I will be liable as owner/hirer of the vehicle, or any replacement vehicle, for any fixed penalty offence, penalty charge notice, notice to owner, parking charge notice for that vehicle under s66 Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, Schedule 6 Road Traffic Act 1991, Traffic Management Act 2004, Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and any other relevant legislation.

The mention of both "parking charge notices" and the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) in Section 16 of the agreement makes a significant difference. Here’s how it affects the situation:

PoFA Requirements:

Since Section 16 refers to both parking charge notices and PoFA, it acknowledges that Hertz must handle such notices in compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Under PoFA paragraph 13, if a parking charge notice is issued by a private parking company, Hertz has the option to transfer liability to the hirer (you), allowing you to take responsibility for the notice and, crucially, to appeal if necessary.

Failure to Follow PoFA:

Despite this reference to PoFA, Hertz did not follow the correct legal process outlined in PoFA paragraph 13. Instead of transferring liability to you as the hirer, which would have been the appropriate course of action, they directly paid the charge. This payment means that liability was admitted, effectively removing your ability to contest the charge or appeal it through proper channels.

Contractual Obligations Under PoFA:

By failing to comply with PoFA, Hertz has breached its own rental agreement. The agreement refers to PoFA, which outlines a clear legal mechanism for transferring liability in cases involving private parking charge notices. Hertz should have relied on this mechanism to transfer liability to you, rather than pay the charge themselves and then pass the cost on to you without giving you the chance to contest the charge.

No Obligation to Pay Immediately:

PoFA does not require Hertz to pay a private PCN immediately upon receiving it. Instead, they should have passed the notice to you, allowing you to respond or appeal within the 28-day period specified under PoFA. By paying the PCN directly, Hertz has deprived you of your legal rights under this Act.

Key Argument:

Since Hertz acknowledged PoFA in the agreement but failed to follow its procedures, they have breached both their contractual obligations and your legal rights under PoFA. Their payment of the PCN without transferring liability is a direct violation of the Act, and this action should never have taken place.

Here is a slightly amended version of the response you should be sending to Nisola:

Quote

Dear Nisola,

Your recent response regarding the payment of a private parking charge notice (PCN) demonstrates a severe misunderstanding of both the nature of the charge and Hertz’s contractual obligations under the hire agreement. I am truly astounded by Hertz’s total failure to comprehend the basic legal framework surrounding PCNs issued by private parking companies.

Let me clarify: a PCN issued by a private parking company is not a "fine" or "penalty" in any legal sense. It is an invoice for an alleged breach of contract. There is no "offence" involved, no "law" has been broken, and no statutory authority is involved. By paying this speculative invoice on my behalf, Hertz has accepted liability for a matter in which no liability existed on my part, and in doing so, has forfeited my right to appeal.

All Hertz had to do was transfer liability to me, the hirer, as required under PoFA paragraph 13. This simple action would have been the end of the matter as far as Hertz was concerned. Instead of following this straightforward process, you chose to pay the charge directly, removing my ability to appeal. This is a clear failure on Hertz’s part to comply with both PoFA and your own rental agreement.

Section 16 of your agreement explicitly mentions both "parking charge notices" and the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA). This clearly indicates that Hertz is aware of the requirements under PoFA, including the obligation to transfer liability to the hirer in the event of a private parking charge. By failing to transfer liability, Hertz has breached both the agreement and PoFA itself.

The nonsensical paragraph in your response is particularly infuriating: "Furthermore, to be a fair vendor, we send the fines across to you as soon as we get them so that you can appeal. You will be refunded for each appeal you win. So, anytime we send a fine you do not agree with, let us know and we will send you the appeal document. Unfortunately, we have to go through the process of sending the fines to you and you request for an appeal because we can't appeal on your behalf as you are the driver. We wouldn’t know what you were doing in the location where the driving law was broken."

This statement shows an utter lack of understanding. No "driving law" has been broken, no "fine" was issued, and Hertz had no obligation to pay a private parking invoice on my behalf. All you had to do was transfer the liability, which is both the legal requirement and the appropriate action under PoFA.

Furthermore, the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association (BVRLA) guidelines clearly distinguish between private parking charges and statutory penalties or fines. Your decision to pay this charge without transferring liability to me as the hirer is in direct contravention of these guidelines, further highlighting Hertz’s negligence in this matter.

Additionally, this action breaches the Consumer Rights Act (CRA) 2015. As mentioned previously, Section 62 prohibits terms that put consumers at an unfair disadvantage, and Section 57 prevents me from bearing costs I am not liable for under the agreement. You have extended the scope of the agreement beyond what was contractually agreed, and I am now holding Hertz liable for the money you have wrongfully charged me.

If you are still unable to comprehend the seriousness of this issue, I suggest you escalate this matter to your superiors or, if necessary, directly to Hertz's legal advisors. I will not hesitate to initiate litigation to recover the funds you have unlawfully taken from me, as well as any additional costs incurred.

This is my final request for a full refund of the amount Hertz wrongly paid on my behalf. I also demand that Hertz conduct an internal review to ensure this incompetence does not continue to affect other customers.

I expect a prompt and appropriate response.

Yours sincerely,

Thank you so much. I will send your reply to Hertz and report back if and when I get a reply.

The wording suggests it should hit your bank imminently, so perhaps wait a few days to see what you receive.

You've got to love "...gotten it." 

Thank you everyone. I will keep you updated and will let you know when I "gotten" whole of my refund 

So, you have 1 "penalty" for an "offence" from a council and 15 invoices from unregulated private companies. I really don't know why you are still referring to the as "fines" as it only serves to solidify Hertz's own lack of understanding.

How could you accumulate so many parking charges over such a short period of time?

This bit is crucial in the response you received:

Some of these will be sent to us for payment, which we will pay and recover from you by way of reimbursement. Alternatively, we may be required to provide your details to the relevant authority or other third party, who will contact you directly.  Where we pass your details to a third party this will be in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

All the parking charges (PCNs) should have had liability transferred to you by Hertz according to PoFA section 13. Once that had been done, there would be no more liability to Hertz and it would have been up to the PPC to issue you with an NtH and you could have dealt with it.

If Hertz paid any of the NtKs (PCNs) they received from APCOA or MET, then they have breached the CRA. There was simply no reason for them to do so and if they did, they removed any possibility of you appealing the PCN.

As for the Admin charges, that is between you and Hertz.