Up until now I had only replied to them by referring them to my first letter which denied responsibility. I've now sent the following letter. There may be minor inaccuracies and overstatements - credit to legalpete from pepipoo for most of the following. The TV and newspaper bits are true, but the TV company does not normally do this kind of thing an are not sure if it will sell. Sorry about the length of this, but I had to get it off my chest.
Dear Sir or Madam:
Please read this carefully, because the wrong action following this letter by your company may result a very public court case. I have already had interest from a TV production company, and a local newspaper on following this case.
1. Dispute.
I was at my place of work all day on XX/XX/07 and did not drive my car that day. I did not enter XXX XXXX Park. If somebody entered into an agreement with you on that day, then it certainly was not me. I therefore dispute that I owe you anything. Please note the word ”dispute” and say it very clearly to your Debt Recovery Agency, as they (and you) will risk prosecution if they attempt to touch any of my property.
2. Parking Charge Notice (PCN)
You have sent me an invoice which purports to be a PCN. A PCN to most people is a Penalty Charge Notice, for which there are provisions in the Road Traffic Act 1991. Also your FINAL REMINDER states “3. As the registered owner / keeper / of the vehicle you are legally liable for the parking charge even if you were not the driver at the time.” I suggest that you ask your legal department to study that statement and comment on its accuracy.
I also urge you to study Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, but just incase you do not have a copy to hand I will enlighten you;
Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:
(a) harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or occasion of their making, or any accompanying threat or publicity are calculated to subject him or his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;
(b) falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;
© falsely represent themselves to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment;
(d) utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.
Paragraph (a) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise legal) for the purpose of :
(1) of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or
(2) of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.
It is also provided that a person may be guilty of an offence under paragraph (a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.
3. Breach of Contract
If a person parks on your car park they enter into a contract and agree to your terms. If they did something contrary to those terms then they would be in breach of the contract. The common law holds that the remedy for breach of contract is damages. Therefore you would be entitled to damages covering the costs incurred as a result of breaching the contract. In this case there were no costs involved - your attendants job description will I am sure include the issue of invoices, which means his/her salary would have to be paid regardless. Perhaps you would argue that the car was over the line of the bay thus preventing another customer from parking - it would not work however in this case unless their car was triangular and was dropped into position – take another look at your photo. There is no lost revenue in a free car park either. You may now claim expenses in writing the many letters to me, but I think that you will find I did, (in an attempt to save you time and money) very kindly point out your error in my first correspondence.
4. Exorbitant Terms of Contract
If there had been a case to answer here then I think that any court would agree that the sum of money you are claiming is totally disproportionate to the alleged offence. I suggest you study the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999).
5. - (1) 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.
(2) 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.
(3) Notwithstanding that a specific term or certain aspects of it in a contract has been individually negotiated, these Regulations shall apply to the rest of a contract if an overall assessment of it indicates that it is a pre-formulated standard contract.
(4) It shall be for any seller or supplier who claims that a term was individually negotiated to show that it was.
(5) Schedule 2 to these Regulations contains an indicative and non-exhaustive list of the terms which may be regarded as unfair.”
The full schedules can be found on various government sites. Most notably Statutory Instrument 1999 No. 2083
You might also want to look at the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.
5. Harassment
I see your charge as unlawful, unenforceable and I am not liable. I will not be providing any payment and your continued pursuit of this matter will constitute an offence under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997. I consider the matter closed and am explicitly instructing you not to contact me again for any reason. I shall be passing any further correspondence from you or anybody acting on your behalf to the police as further evidence of harassment.