There's no evidence that anything untoward is happening as regards the Trust's processes for letting this contract. Monitoring/oversight - who knows?
OP, back to the PCN.
General:
Your posts refer to 'I' and 'we'. If it's 'we' pl confirm that any appeal would be made by the correct legal entity. Also, as you were not apparently driving, what weight could PALS put on any claims made by you?
Some thoughts.
The car park:
Is it pay on exit? I ask so that we hear it from you - although this could be deduced.
If POE, then does this operate in the manner suggested i.e. the only user input is a VRM?
If there aren't any barriers on exit then is it possible for a driver to enter the wrong VRM, make a payment and still exit? The obvious answer is yes, but only if that VRM is still on-site. The key here is making a payment. The charge for parking is not user-entry, it's a system function and requires the system to match its input data(the VRMs recorded as entering and being on site) with the data entered into the payment system. A correctly functioning system then only has the following options:
1. To notify the user that the entered data are not recognised; or
2. To determine and indicate a payment due as at the time of the transaction;
3. On payment of the indicated sum to produce a receipt(whether this requires further user input as in 'do you require a receipt' I don't know);
4. To abort the transaction
In this case, a receipt was produced - which hasn't been posted- which means that the user entry was accepted by the system and the full indicated parking tariff paid. The receipt indicates that payment was made at 10.40 and subsequent operator data shows VRM **** leaving the site at 10.42.
The tariff paid was £*****. Retrospectively, the tariff board has been examined and the correct sum which should have been calculated by the payment system was £***** being the advertised sum for a stay of 1hr 48minutes i.e. between entry and payment.
Any variance between the user's payment and a retrospective calculation is a fault to be laid at the operator's door i.e. they may not visit errors in their charging system on to a user but accept responsibility and maintain their equipment to the required standard. It is interesting to note that miscalculating the tariff was not the system's only fault at that time because the receipt produced did not include the full VRM. As explained above, this cannot have been the result of user error because demand for payment is predicated upon the correct VRM having been entered - unless this is another fault with the system i.e. calculating random charges based upon the VRM of a vehicle which isn't even on site and, as in this case(confirmed by DVLA), doesn't even exist.
OP, what should have been the tariff based upon 1hr 48mins and pl post the receipt.
