This once happened to me nidge1.
I refused to admit or agree that it was a fine, but reminded them that I considered it to be a parking invoice. This is what I wrote:-
Re: ref ******** for (My car registration) from ** February ****
Dear Sir or Madam,
I, as registered keeper of the above vehicle, dispute this invoice. The driver must have been a customer of ******** and I can only imagine they did not see the signage. In any event the charges are penal and not a genuine pre estimate of loss, as well as being an amount larger than permitted under the BPA code of practice to which you subscribe. I believe you have failed to follow the BPA code of practice and attempted to impose a penalty charge for either breach of contract or trespass.
I would like to point out a few points:
Since there was no demonstrable loss/damage and yet a breach of contract has been alleged for a free car park, it can only remain a fact that this 'charge' is an attempt at extorting an unlawful charge to impersonate a parking ticket. This is similar to the decisions in several County Court cases such as Excel Parking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman ( 2008 ), also OBServices v Thurlow (review, February 2011), Parking Eye v Smith (Manchester County Court December 2011) and UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012) .*
The ********** is either charging for losses or it is a penalty/fine.
The ********** could state the letter as an invoice or request for monies, but chooses to use the wording "PARKING CHARGE NOTICE" in an attempt to be deemed an official parking fine similar to those issued by the Police and Council Wardens.
The signage on site states that parking is limited to 1 hour with no return within 1 hour. There is no option to stay for longer by paying. A clear penalty.
I would assume that there is and was no contract between ********** and the driver, but even if there was a contract then it is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. So the requirements of forming a contract such as a meeting of minds, agreement, certainty of terms, etc, were not satisfied.
The charge that was levied is an unfair term, and therefore not binding, pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. In particular, Schedule 2 of those Regulations gives an indicative (and non-exhaustive) list of terms which may be regarded as unfair and includes at Schedule 2(1)(e) "Terms which have the object or effect of requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation." Furthermore, Regulation 5(1) states that: "A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer" and 5(2) states: "A term shall always be regarded as not having been individually negotiated where it has been drafted in advance and the consumer has therefore not been able to influence the substance of the term."
I will not name the driver as I am under no statutory obligation to do so and I also cannot remember who was driving at this time and date stated. As a result of this, I believe these correspondents have no relevance to myself as keeper of the vehicle.
Because of the above reasons and grounds for dispute in this matter, I do not wish to receive any further correspondence from your company, except to state that this matter has ended and there will be no further proceedings. If I am sent any further unwarranted distressing correspondents that threaten proceedings or demand financial compensation in any way, I will pass these on to police and start a claim of harassment. My time and financial cost in legally researching this matter has added up to a sum beyond what you could reasonably request by your company with regards to the administration of this matter.
This has been sent by recorded delivery to reach you in reasonable time from the date of your letter ** February ****.
Yours faithfully
HurricaneSmith
Needless to say, in my case I received a reply saying that they would not pursue to matter. Good luck with whatever you choose to do!!!
.