Parking Charge Notices

[Falkirk300zx]

Whilst working for my client in Edinburgh, I parked my car in my client's carpark (it is land he owns) and undertook work in his building.

An issue arose when Smart Parking Ltd issued 3 PCNs stating I was parked in a private carpark which is fully owned by another building owner. I checked with my client and he confirmed that he owned part of the land and the other guy owned part of the land, he interestingly informed me and sent letter evidence confirming that Smart Parking were made aware of the issue that the other guy did not own the all the land. Smart parking thanked him for letting them know this, again I have seen this letter.

I filled in their on-line form stating that I was parked with the land owner's consent and these PCNs should be cancelled. It was rejected and I was told to deal with the debt company from that point on. I contacted the debt recovery company (on hold for ages) and spoke to them directly clarifying that I was parked with permission of the land owner, they replied saying effectively that they had investigated the matter (they have not contacted my client but I'm guessing spoke to the guy who is claiming that he owns all the land) and rejected this. Also, when I spoke to the debt company and I did explicitly inform them of my client and Smart Parking knew that the other guy does not own all the land.

My question is, can I invoice them for letters/communication (Yip... just to be an arse) or simply let them take it to court and counter claim at that point? Or is there an alternative?

Thanks in advance.

 

[WaveJumper]

Do both

 

[NHAccountant]

Did they inform you of a third party dispute resolution/appeal service? I'm not sure about Scottish law, but in England & Wales thay have to offer this.

 

[DontAsk]

Do both

This.

Make as big an arse of yourself as you can, as far as they are concerned.

Give them chance to back off, but let out enough rope for them to hang themselves with in court.

Good luck! Do let us know the outcome.

I would also kicking up a stink on social media if they have a presence.

 

[Mark T Jones]

I played precisely this game during lockdown - I did a day's agency work for Morrisons, booked my car in at the store only to get a ticket.

Failed on appeal & they started their collection letters.

I responded to each one with an admin invoice and a warning letter curiously reminiscent of their own.

They responded to one saying they rejected my invoices - so I responded in kind (with a further admin charge), and so it continued.

Not sure whether it's coincidence, but their letters stopped at the end of the year.

I mildly regret not pursuing them to court level now, just to see.

 

[MBE2017]

I would email a set of charges for having to deal with their false claim, ie £50 per letter, £75 to reply to a letter, £25 per five minute phone call etc and state any further correspondence will be charged accordingly, re iterating you were parked with permission.

I would also get copies of the letters showing they knew of this situation, proof you had permission etc. Try to get a conclusion though, it can be annoying on a credit file.

 

[kulture]

I would also consider talking to their regulatory body, they have a duty to ensure that the have the landowner's permission, which clearly they do not. Have fun, stir up trouble for them.

 

[Falkirk300zx]

Thanks for your replies.

I've sent them a letter outlining fees regarding my charges. It as is fair as the £170.00 they are charging me PER VISIT!!

My client sent me evidence of them knowing about the circumstances regarding that particular site. This is why I'm not concerned about the letters and threats and I've already explained to them that I wish to just miss out the correspondence and go straight to court.

Fed up with this kind of behavior by these 'greed is good' companies and really object to stuff that they sent which includes all the successful court cases, including that woman from Dundee owing £22k. Whilst on my moral high horse, I wonder how many people have been stung with this?? (although granted they probably didn't have permission to be there).

 

[Gyumri]

My question is, can I invoice them for letters/communication

I can't see what legal basis you can claim for your time and money at the present time in dealing with this matter.

I would take up the matter with the adjoining landowner on whose behalf the parking company is working as his agent.

 

[Newchodge]

I can't see what legal basis you can claim for your time and money at the present time in dealing with this matter.

I would take up the matter with the adjoining landowner on whose behalf the parking company is working as his agent.

But the dispute is between the OP and the parking company, not the non-landowner.

 

[Falkirk300zx]

"I would take up the matter with the adjoining landowner on whose behalf the parking company is working as his agent."

Unfortunately, he is claiming it is all his land (title deeds, land records, seller's package all clearly state it is not!).

On the matter of invoicing them, surely, I have as much legal right to invoice them as they have to invoice me.

 

[Newchodge]

"I would take up the matter with the adjoining landowner on whose behalf the parking company is working as his agent."

Unfortunately, he is claiming it is all his land (title deeds, land records, seller's package all clearly state it is not!).

On the matter of invoicing them, surely, I have as much legal right to invoice them as they have to invoice me.

You have the right to invoice whomsoever you choose to invoice, unless it is an attempt at fraud. You may not have the right to get paid.

 

[Mark T Jones]

On the matter of invoicing them, surely, I have as much legal right to invoice them as they have to invoice me.

Be honest with yourself, what is the actual chance of you pursuing this through court?

It's a distraction game you are playing with them, plus a potential counter claim if they choose to go to court - which itself is relatively unlikely, as they will use a similar guide to me - and won't pursue a claim where they aren't certain of success (there are plenty which are).

Mirror their charging structure, and have fun until it fizzles out.

 

[kulture]

You have the right to invoice whomsoever you choose to invoice, unless it is an attempt at fraud. You may not have the right to get paid.

Exactly, but in invoicing you are documenting what their demands are costing you through time wasted

Be honest with yourself, what is the actual chance of you pursuing this through court?

It's a distraction game you are playing with them, plus a potential counter claim if they choose to go to court - which itself is relatively unlikely, as they will use a similar guide to me - and won't pursue a claim where they aren't certain of success (there are plenty which are).

Mirror their charging structure, and have fun until it fizzles out.

I agree completely. Leave it to the parking company to take the matter to court and then raise a counter claim. If they are stupid enough to take this to court then enjoy it.

 

[The Byre]

I had a case like this in Scotlandshire when my wife parked too long at some shop. I ignored the entire thing, I did not write or even acknowledge their existence. £50 turned into £75, turned into £175, and so on all the way to threatening letters against my person for £500.

I ignored the bloody lot because, under Scottish law, they must litigate against the person that actually parked the car. I was not that person. If they had been stupid enough to take that to court, I would merely have to prove that I was somewhere else, which I could have done. They gave up and it stopped.

 

[DontAsk]

I can't see what legal basis you can claim for your time and money at the present time in dealing with this matter.

You don't need a "Legal basis", if someone costs you time and effort you can invoice them. You might not be sucessful, just as this parking company should not be successful. What "legal basis" are they working from?

There is at least one well documented case of this being done against nuisance callers, invoicing for time answering the calls, and winning in court.

 

[Gyumri]

Whilst working for my client in Edinburgh, I parked my car in my client's carpark (it is land he owns)

Then you are not trespassing on the adjoining owner's land by parking on it.

But the dispute is between the OP and the parking company, not the non-landowner.

The latter is just an agent of the supposed adjoining owner. The real argument is with the principal - the supposed landowner.

Unfortunately, he is claiming it is all his land (title deeds, land records, seller's package all clearly state it is not!).

On the matter of invoicing them, surely, I have as much legal right to invoice them as they have to invoice me.

I would revert to your client and ask him to raise the problem with the so-called adjoining owner that his clients like you are being harassed for parking lawfully on your client's land.

You can claim up to £15 per hour as a litigant in person from court if you win, but who wants to go down that road?

Make your position known to the parking Co and that should be the end of it.

 

[kulture]

Then you are not trespassing on the adjoining owner's land by parking on it.

The latter is just an agent of the supposed adjoining owner. The real argument is with the principal - the supposed landowner.

I would revert to your client and ask him to raise the problem with the so-called adjoining owner that his clients like you are being harassed for parking lawfully on your client's land.

You can claim up to £15 per hour as a litigant in person from court if you win, but who wants to go down that road?

Make your position known to the parking Co and that should be the end of it.

You have failed to read the post or indeed understand the situation. The OP has a dispute with the parking company. There is no contractual relationship with the other "owner" of the land. The dispute with the parking company is that typical dispute that says because you have parked there you have agreed with the contract laid out on the signs. This is a contract between you and the parking company.

The OP is being chased by the parking company and the debt collection company and his case is that he had permission to park there by the landowner and the parking company does NOT have permission to enforce parking on the part of the land where the OP parked. Now if he can prove these facts, that he parked on land on which the parking company does not have permission, or that he had permission to park there from the owner of the land and can prove that client really is the owner (preferably by using the land registry), then any case taken to court will be lost by the parking company.

The OP should reply to every correspondence that he disputes the amount, that the contract is not valid, and that they should either take him to court, where he can prove his case, or they should go away.

 

[SeahorseFL]

Hi,

You have an insta-win here if you’re correct about the land ownership.

I’d stop dealing with the collecting company itself and get your appeal in. You’ll lose but losing allows you to take it to one of the two industry regulators.

The insta-win is that any contract is only enforceable if the parking operator is able to provide a copy of the contract between themselves and the landowner. If you are right and your guy owns the land the operator will be unable to do that and that’s a statutory obligation for them to be able to enforce.

If the operator is regulated by Popla your appeal will succeed at that stage. The only other regulator always refuses any appeal so you force it to court, raise the same appeal grounds and watch them drop it then make a costs application. You cannot lose if your guy owns the land. If they produce a valid contract you simply enter the land registry title and plan for the land to show the contract doesn’t cover the area you parked in. You can’t lose on these grounds.

If by some horrible mistake you’re wrong and your client does own the land AND has a valid contract with the operator they can ask the operator to drop the fine and the operator must do so.

You’d struggle to lose this appeal if you’re correct on the land ownership.

I have no idea of your chances of success in claiming back costs from the client or operator I’m afraid, I’ve never heard of that working outside of issued proceedings but we do a LOT of parking appeals so would be very interested to hear if you found a way to enforce your time outside of court against an operator!!

 

[The Resolver]

These casese are based on an idea that you entered into a contract with the parking company under which you agreed either not to park at all in the absence of permission or to park but pay if you stay over a certan time period. For the parking company to prove the existence of the contract they first of all have to prove that it is more likely than not that you saw and read a notice displayed on the premises which amounted to an offer. Was there a notice you saw and could read (ie not so high with such a small font that you could not read ) and did you then act in a way that shows you to agree with the contract (and thereby accept the offer) , I can;t see them succeeding in this case since you had reason to believe you had permission lrleady and did not need to renter into their contract,

As to the invoices, you have a right to issue but will not have a right, as yet, to enforce. Additionally, as this is a Small Claim Track case, even if you win, it is not normal for the court to order that the Claimants , as the losing party, pay your costs. As they also will not normallly receive the benefit of an Order of they win for you to pay their costs, it makes no economic sense for them to sue you at all.

On a side point., and relevant if you have any sort of defence, the Ministry of Justice announced last week that it is introducing new rules requiring all parties in Small Claims Track cases (as this one - cases up to £10,000) to partticipate in mediation.. It will be a very limited and cut down version of mediation (one hour on the phone - but free) but mandated mediation in general is a first.

 

[Financial-Modeller]

Slightly contrarian viewpoint, but if OP's client gave written permission to park on their land, invoice the client for parking expenses and let them deal with the parking company / other landowner etc.

Whlst not great for the relationship that the OP has with their client, subsequent lack of clarity around title to the land and who appointed the parking company is a problem(s) for the client to deal with, not the OP.



Edit, just noticed this was in Edinburgh. I have no idea whether there are significant differences between English and Scottish laws on this subject.