3. Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services  (Read 1064 times)

0 Members and 150 Guests are viewing this topic.

Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« on: »
Hi

Driver has a Parking Charge from MET Parking Services, for the offence of Failure to validate stay in car park.

The driver has evidence from a Debit Card that they had paid for a meal in KFC,  the driver did not see the signs and was not notified by staff (the driver lives to far to go snap a Photo of the site).

The driver was confused when approaching the Parking Meter when it asked to validate ticket, the driver is still not sure how to do that (does he show receipt to machine ?).  The driver panicked and we assume pressed the button and the Barrier opened, ahh relief.

Should the driver appeal this ? It seems really harsh considering driver had paid KFC for a meal.

Attached a redacted copy of letter.

TIA [ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: September 27, 2024, 10:33:27 am by nickyboy »
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #1 on: »
To help us help you, please read the following thread and provide as much of the information it asks for that you are able to provide - READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide
Logged
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #2 on: »
I've adjusted original message to comply with rules - can't seem to attach an attachment saying The upload folder is full. Please try a smaller file and/or contact an administrator, it's only 20Kb
Logged
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #3 on: »
The thread I linked to also provides instructions on how to add images to your posts without encountering that error.

Also, if the notice was sent by post, it will have been sent to the keeper. MET have no idea who was driving.
Logged
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #4 on: »
FYI, KFC Gatwick is on land under statutory control as it is within the airport boundary and therefore is not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA.

What this means is that under no circumstances should you, the Keeper, identify the driver. If you do identify the driver, you have thrown away what is known as a "golden ticket".

MET will try and argue that the land is private and so is relevant land. However, we have maps of the Gatwick Airport boundary and, even if the land is private, it does not matter as it is within the airport boundary and subject to airport bylaws and therefore, not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA.

So, don't blab the drivers identity, inadvertently or otherwise, as there is no Keeper liability.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #5 on: »
Would this me an appropriate appeal :-

"As I understand there is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so, I've also been made aware that the KFC Gatwick is on land under statutory control as it is within the airport boundary and therefore is not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA." ?
Logged
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #6 on: »
Why have you not yet read the linked thread above and shown us the Notice to Keeper (NtK)?

The appeal to MET should be worded exactly like this:

Quote
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 Gatwick Airport is not 'relevant land'.

The location of the KFC within the boundaries of Gatwick Airport is highly relevant to this appeal. Gatwick Airport is subject to statutory control under Airport Bylaws, which means that any land within those boundaries, regardless of whether it is publicly accessible or deemed 'private land' by a parking operator, cannot be subject to PoFA. It is the statutory nature of the airport, not the ownership of the land, that dictates whether PoFA applies. As Gatwick Airport is governed by bylaws, it is excluded from being 'relevant land' for the purposes of PoFA, and Keeper liability cannot be imposed.

If Gatwick Airport landowners 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.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #7 on: »
Apologies - here's the image.

« Last Edit: September 30, 2024, 12:46:52 pm by DWMB2 »
Logged
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #8 on: »
Need to see ALL dates and times.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #9 on: »
Owner of the car has now been sent this...what should I do now ?




Logged
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #10 on: »
You appeal to POPLA. You have until Wednesday 13th November to submit the POPLA appeal.

Why have you not un-redacted the dates on the NtK as requested? It would help if we could see the  date of the alleged contravention on NtK. We already know that the date of "issue" was 13th September.

Show us what you think you should appeal on to POPLA and we will provide advice.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services
« Reply #11 on: »
Here's a draft POPLA appeal for you:

Quote
POPLA Appeal: PCN No: [Insert PCN Number]
MET Parking Services
Location: KFC, Gatwick Airport

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, and I am appealing the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued by MET Parking Services on the following grounds:

1. Gatwick Airport is Governed by Bylaws – No Keeper Liability

MET Parking has argued that the land in question is private and therefore not governed by the airport bylaws. This assertion is incorrect and must be refuted. The statutory control of Gatwick Airport, which is governed by bylaws, applies regardless of whether the land is considered 'private' or publicly accessible. The key issue here is not ownership but the fact that the land falls within the boundaries of Gatwick Airport, which is subject to bylaws.

Private land within the airport boundary does not exempt the operator from the statutory control of the bylaws. The bylaws cover all land within the designated boundary of the airport, as evidenced by the airport map shown in the "Additional Evidence" at the end of this appeal, and this statutory nature of the airport excludes the land from being considered "relevant land" under PoFA.

Therefore, MET Parking cannot apply PoFA at this location, and as such, they cannot hold me, the registered keeper, liable for this charge. By attempting to do so, MET is acting outside of their legal authority, and their Notice to Keeper is invalid.

2. Breach of the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) v9 – Section 2.15

MET Parking is also in breach of Section 2.15 of the BPA Code of Practice v9, which states:

"Where parking on land is subject to Byelaws you must ensure that your practices are in accordance with them or that you don’t operate a scheme that is prohibited by them. For the avoidance of doubt, land managed under Byelaws is not considered as ‘Relevant Land’ under PoFA."

By issuing this PCN and falsely claiming PoFA provisions apply, MET is operating a scheme that is prohibited on land governed by bylaws. MET has completely disregarded the statutory control governing Gatwick Airport and misrepresented their ability to enforce keeper liability under PoFA, which constitutes a violation of this section of the BPA Code of Practice.

3. Breach of the BPA Code of Practice v9 – Section 22.10

MET Parking is also in breach of Section 22.10 of the BPA Code of Practice, which states:

"Your letter to the keeper should point out the details of the unauthorised parking event and ask for payment or request details of the driver. If you are not making use of the keeper liability provisions of PoFA or you are unable to achieve the deadlines specified therein, your letter must not reference PoFA or state that the keeper is liable. If the parking charge notice is not being issued under the provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 it must not reference this legislation."

As outlined above, Gatwick Airport land is not relevant land under PoFA, and as such, MET cannot invoke keeper liability. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued by MET falsely references PoFA and incorrectly states that the keeper is liable, even though PoFA does not apply. This is a direct breach of Section 22.10 of the BPA CoP and further invalidates MET's claim.

4. No Obligation to Identify the Driver

As the keeper of the vehicle, I am under no legal obligation to identify the driver, especially since PoFA does not apply on this land. MET Parking Services cannot demand driver details from me, and their attempt to hold me liable as the keeper is illegitimate. I reiterate that I have declined to name the driver, as I am not required to do so by any law.

5. Conclusion

Given the clear breach of the BPA Code of Practice and the fact that PoFA does not apply on land governed by bylaws, I respectfully request that this appeal be upheld, and the PCN be cancelled. MET Parking Services has no legal right to pursue keeper liability in this case, and their claim should be dismissed.

Additional Evidence

Gatwick Airport Boundary Map from Gatwick Masterplan 2019. Area outlined in blue is area shown in Google Maps of the location below:



See page 152 https://www.gatwickairport.com/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-Gatwick-Library/default/dw5fa1fcde/images/Corporate-PDFs/Masterplan/Gatwick_Airport_Masterplan_2019.pdf

Google Maps location showing KFC Gatwick Airport:

Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  3. Parking / KFC Gatwick - MET Parking Services