Suspicious Parking Penalty

AmDaMan · 9 May 2009 at 12:43

Ok first off let me show you the ticket;

So after an exam, me and a few mates went to KFC to get a bit of food / reflect on the exam. Were in there for quite a bit while ordering food ect.

Anyway is there a time limit you can eat food these days in places like this? Why is the fine so outrageous - £75 / £150?

Anyone know anything about Civil Enforcement Ltd? There's no mention of the council maybe because the carpark is privately owned but is this fine justified?

cheers.

Lashout_UK · 9 May 2009 at 12:45

Well I know Mcdonalds enforces a 75 (iirc) minute limit.

Did you not look at the signs? If not, go and look now. Bit late, mind

Solari · 9 May 2009 at 12:56

It's not from a council or other local authority, so can't he tell them to do one?

Rybo89 · 9 May 2009 at 12:56

ask for proof

Solari · 9 May 2009 at 12:57

Rybo89 said:
ask for proof

They want 10 quid for that. :eek:

IIRC these kind of things would never get to court - there's no way parking a few minutes over the allowance incurs them £150 in costs/lost business.

Glaucus · 9 May 2009 at 13:02

Phone some one who knows or can point you in the right direction, like cab. Best to try and get it sorted.

Solari · 9 May 2009 at 13:06

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.u.../119802-private-parking-tickets-template.html

The fact that they have "evidence" makes me wonder if you'd need a different approach, however. I wonder if talking to KFC might help, as you *were* in there eating at the time!

Burnsy2023 · 9 May 2009 at 13:11

They need to prove you were the driver, not the registered keeper. Unless they can prove you were driving, you have nothing to worry about.

I would be inclined to pay the £10 for proof and then tell them where to shove it.

RockLobster · 9 May 2009 at 13:11

DO NOT PAY IT! There's countless posts about this company on the net.

NickXX · 9 May 2009 at 13:20

DO NOT PAY IT. I received the following in 2007:

They gave up trying about a year ago

Don't even bother replying, they can't get the money out of you.

Muffin` · 9 May 2009 at 13:20

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?autocom=ibwiki&cmd=article&id=56

So you need to respond with that you are the registered keeper and have entered into no contract with them and you don't know who was driving that day.

It gets done all the time with the pool cars at work, they never respond.

andi · 9 May 2009 at 13:24

Thieving gits. Get on the internet, Pepipoo is a good place to start, and tell them where to stick it. The "photographic evidence" is probably a photo of your car that proves nothing. Can't believe they want £10 just for that, and then £100 for the fine, the entire industry is a shambles.

NickXX · 9 May 2009 at 13:26

Muffin` said:
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?autocom=ibwiki&cmd=article&id=56

So you need to respond with that you are the registered keeper and have entered into no contract with them and you don't know who was driving that day.

It gets done all the time with the pool cars at work, they never respond.

You don't need to do anything. Ignore it and don't waste the stamp.

AmDaMan · 9 May 2009 at 13:34

thanks for the advice chaps!

Why do they persist and operate if they can't legally get the money out of you though?

Cheers.

Burnsy2023 · 9 May 2009 at 13:38

AmDaMan said:
thanks for the advice chaps!

Why do they persist and operate if they can't legally get the money out of you though?

Cheers.

Like I said, they need to prove you were the driver, which is difficult. They persist, because most people pay them.

NickXX · 9 May 2009 at 13:39

AmDaMan said:
thanks for the advice chaps!

Why do they persist and operate if they can't legally get the money out of you though?

Cheers.

Because they think they can scare you into paying. Works on most people I'd guess.

Look at my comedy 'Final reminder'.

AmDaMan · 9 May 2009 at 13:40

So basically if my face is on their CCTV i'm liable and have to cough up? They obviously think they have my face otherwise they wouldn't have sent the letter would they or am I wrong?

Solari · 9 May 2009 at 13:41

They are just scum/cowboys tbh. I'd not bother replying until I got some sort of threat of legal action, where I'd put the onus on them to prove who was driving.

Why hasn't the law come down on these firms like a tonne of bricks? What they are doing is pretty much extortion.

Dale V · 9 May 2009 at 13:43

Ive just recieved one of these, its dated the 14th april 2009, and the parking offence was the 26th march 2009 ... after sending them a comical letter back advising no payment would be made and I wasnt the driver, i recieved a letter back stating "payment is now needed by 13th January 2005" otherwise the charge will goto £100

quite funny really

NickXX · 9 May 2009 at 13:46

AmDaMan said:
So basically if my face is on their CCTV i'm liable and have to cough up? They obviously think they have my face otherwise they wouldn't have sent the letter would they or am I wrong?

No. They are trying their luck. My face was probably on the camera - the fact is their whole business is flawed.

They are saying the Registered Keeper entered into a contract with the car park owners by staying in the car park for more than the permitted time. They are therefore trying to fine the Registered Keeper.

This is flawed because it is the driver they should be going for, NOT the registered keeper. They can ask you who the driver was, but you are under no legal obligation to give them the answer (you would if they were the police or the council).

There is nothing they can do but scare you into paying.