Excel PCN - second notice received with different date but identical photos used

[Diamonds27]

We have a leased car and received a PCN from Excel in September via our leasing company.

The supposed contravention date was 08.09.15 the notice was issued 22.09.15

and date stamped by the leasing company as 28.09.15.

 

We then received directly from Excel the same notice issued on 06.11.15 for the same contravention date 08.09.15.

 

Unable to confirm that we hadn't bought a ticket in the car park (my son was driving) and against my better judgment, my husband paid the £60 fee.

 

Today we have again received a PCN from Excel with the contravention date of 16.10.15 issued on 30.10.15

and dated stamped as received by the leasing company on 03.11.15.

 

 

The 3cm x 3cm photographs on this notice are identical to the photographs on the first notice,

although poor quality you can see the same outlines, shadows, clouds, reflections etc on them.

 

 

On the date in question we were at work and can't have even been in the car park.

 

 

What do we do now?

 

 

Do they now see us as some sort of soft touch as we paid the first notice?

 

 

Can we complain to anyone about this obvious fraud?

 

 

Are we to expect a notice from them every month for the foreseeable future?

 

 

Do they have longer to issue the notice as it's a lease car and they have to contact both the DVLA and the leasing company for our details.

 

We would appreciate any advice.

 

Thanks.

[unclebulgaria67]

We have a leased car and received a PCN from Excel in September via our leasing company. The supposed contravention date was 08.09.15 the notice was issued 22.09.15 and date stamped by the leasing company as 28.09.15.

 

 

We then received directly from Excel the same notice issued on 06.11.15 for the same contravention date 08.09.15.

 

 

Unable to confirm that we hadn't bought a ticket in the car park (my son was driving) and against my better judgment, my husband paid the £60 fee.

 

 

Today we have again received a PCN from Excel with the contravention date of 16.10.15 issued on 30.10.15 and dated stamped as received by the leasing company on 03.11.15. The 3cm x 3cm photographs on this notice are identical to the photographs on the first notice, although poor quality you can see the same outlines, shadows, clouds, reflections etc on them. On the date in question we were at work and can't have even been in the car park.

 

 

What do we do now? Do they now see us as some sort of soft touch as we paid the first notice? Can we complain to anyone about this obvious fraud? Are we to expect a notice from them every month for the foreseeable future? Do they have longer to issue the notice as it's a lease car and they have to contact both the DVLA and the leasing company for our details.

 

 

We would appreciate any advice.

 

 

Thanks.

 

As it appears to be such an obvious fraud attempt, you should take it to your local Police and insist they investigate. Get a crime reference number.

[BankFodder]

Wonderful - sounds like a UKCPS fraud.

 

Obviously you want not to pay this money and also you would like to get your first money back.

I think that I would play a little devious here. Clearly you have enough evidence to prove your case so there is very little risk.

If Excel sued you then you could defend on the fraud and counterclaim for the money you have already paid - plus interest.

 

If this appeals to you then we could discuss the best way to go about it.

We could get you some good publicity on this as well.

[Diamonds27]

Thanks for both replies. My husband did want to go to the police but I thought they would say it was a civil matter. I think we will visit the police station this weekend and I'm also going to contact trading standards.

 

 

I'll post back when there's anything to report.

 

 

Thanks again.

[BankFodder]

I don't expect that you will get much interest from either.

 

However, keep copies of everything before you give them to the police or anyone else.

[ericsbrother]

actionfraud is the recommended route to report,

nothing will happen but if they get a few complaint they may creak into action.

 

 

A complaint to Trading Standards will have more immediate effect,

make sure to mention that it is fraud by misrepresentation under the 2006 Theft Act

so they know where to start and dont assume that you are just moaning about nothing but have a specific complaint.

 

Also report to the local paper about this obvious money making scheme.

 

 

Many logal rags are getting wise to the complaints raised about parking co's and are starting to take them seriously.

 

 

You may well get the response that the ticket is cancelled "as a gesture of goodwill" everyones favouite cop out when they are banged to rights committing criminal offences.

[BazzaS]

make sure to mention that it is fraud by misrepresentation under the 2006 Theft Act so they know where to start and dont assume that you are just moaning about nothing but have a specific complaint.

 

"Misrepresentation" is a civil, not criminal, matter.

 

The criminal offence is "fraud by false representation" (S.2, Fraud Act, 2006, rather than "Theft Act 2006")

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/section/2

[ericsbrother]

No, fraudulent misrepresentation is a criminal offence under S2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

 

 

I agree that in contract law it can be a civil tort or a criminal offence to make fraudulent misrepresentation

 

 

There is also a specific offence of making an advantage by misrepresentation and that advantage does not have to be pecuniary.

 

In short, there is a raft of offences to choose from is you are claiming that someone has taken advantage of a situation outlined in this case.

[BazzaS]

No, fraudulent misrepresentation is a criminal offence under S2 of the Fraud Act 2006.

 

There is also a specific offence of making an advantage by misrepresentation and that advantage does not have to be pecuniary.

 

"Misrepresentation" is indeed a feature of contract law and thus is civil law. Fraudulent misrepresentation is actionable as a tort (again, civil law), not criminal.

 

If you still feel there is a criminal offence of "fraud by misrepresentation" can you point me to it?. It isn't S2 Fraud Act 2006, (see link above), which doesn't mention "misrepresentation" - It refers to "false representation"

[armadillo71]

From the dates given, then both NTKs fail to meet the criteria of Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 IMO...

 

Paragraph 13 for hire vehicles;

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

 

Schedule 4 is so ill written though. IMO the hire company is the RK, the hirer the keeper and the driver whoever is entitled to drive the car...

 

But schedule 4 has the hire company as keeper, and they have not received the NTK within the timescale to allow keeper liability, so no hirer liability either...