Unreasonable parking charges?

LJustmeasking on 12/02/2022 - 15:54

Hey guys, I need a little advice on private parking enforcement. This situation is a little confusing, so please bare with me and this post is going to be very long.

So this private parking is for staff parking space (or anyone staying in the area for a full day). I booked my park, paid full amount of parking fee. However, I made a simple typo mistake (3x) with my rego number, I typed 1 wrong number. When the parking enforcement people sent me the 1st notice ($65 fine), that is when I realised my error. So of course I put forward my appeal right away explaining the matter including the other 2 errors.

Now when they responded, they said. They will "wave the other 2 but stand the first one, because it apparently had created a lot of administration for them. Now bare in mind that in accordance to their 'T's&C's', the fee I paid for my parking ($6) is for their administration work.

Also on their response "I have to pay that $65 in 7 days for their offer to be in effect (that 7 days is within the 21 days of payment to be made of the notice period).

I called Citizens Advice Bureau to get an advice, they said I can 'refuse to pay it', speak to the enforcement people. If that doesn't work, take them to FairGo and Disputes Tribunal or Consummer Protection NZ.

At this point I was getting anxious, because I do feel that for a very minor error, I'm being charged for a huge amount when I paid in full for my parking.

Anyway, I did as was adviced. I contact the organistation, I literally pleaded that I couldn't afford to pay $65, which I honestly couldn't and it was during Christmas which is an expensive time of year.

I apologised for the mistake and if it happens again, I will do my due dilegent to pay for it (probably the wrong words to use on my part). Anyway, I couldn't do much about it.

Now, after their first initial response I sent back my pleading email. Which was ignored 6-7 times until I said to 'not ignore my email'. This is where they then got back to me, that unless I can prove I have not breach their condition of 'I must put in the correct rego number' (Not written however is if I did, I will be fined). There will be 'no' further correspondence from them, unless I paid the amount due, further charges will be incur and will be refer to debt collection.

So I challenge it, studied their T's&C's etc. After that I heard no more from them, no response to my challenge email whatsoever.

I felt threatened, for me it basically says 'Pay up or pay more and bad credit under your name'.

Fast forward, few weeks later. I recieved another notice, they have now added $20 extra for late payment, its now $85 and I must pay within 14 days. (According to Private parking code of conduct) They must send me a reminder notice within 28 days of the first initial one (adding another 14 days). But they didn't send me a reminder letter, they went straight to additional charges.

Now first, when the notice was sent, it was passed the 14days, gave me no time to asses it which would then have incur more charges for me.
Second, 2 other notices arrived, all in the same day of the obove notice (these were the other 2 mistakes). I thought, oh shiittake mushroom (another two $85 notices). That's now 3!!
Third, full mode panick attack! I did some online research, it turns out and according to 'Private parking code of conduct' when sending a additional charges notice, the enforcement company should give another 21 days for payment but they only give me 14 days.

Then, another letter came in the mailbox. This time it was from a debt collector, guess what, I now owe them $405. Shiitake bloody mushroom!

Right away, I got in contact with Consummer Protection, Commerce Commision and Disputes Tribunal. I asked them if I have a case and no one, I mean 'no one' can give me a straight aswer.

I had no choice, I sent the enforcement organisation I would be making a claim of $405. Report them to Commerce Commision and Fairgo for what I believe is unjustifiable.

Enforcement organisation got back to me, saying their "Action and cost is accordance to with the terms and condition on display in the car park and get myself familiarised with 'UK judgements issued in Cavendish Square Holdings BV v Talal El Makdessi & ParkingEye Ltd v Bevis. The same approach was followed in the NZ Supreme Court in 127 Hobson Street Ltd v Honey Bees Preschool Ltd".

What on earth! More online reaserch.

Finally, I managed to get in contact with Community Law Centre. When they said, this can be considered unreasonable. I sighed in relief I thought, finally someone is willing to help me.

However, hope came crushing down. Community Law could not help me, its out of their funded service.

Now I don't know what to do. I will still push forward with my claim. So hoping someone can help me with the law here, I'd be really greatful.

Please no hateful comment, I don't need it right now. I'm already stressed out and I'm only asking for advice.

If you need more info, I'd be happy to provide :)

Thank you!

General Discussion

Comments

  • bigcheese on 12/02/2022 - 16:06
    +2

    Maybe @homegardener could help you? They put a post up about a number of consumer advice articles just a few days ago here

  • Bill on 12/02/2022 - 17:09
    +2

    Have all communication retained in writing. Talk to the debt collection agency and tell them the situation, let them know you dispute the charges. If they do not agree with you and threaten to put this on your credit record take it to the disputes tribunal. I doubt the tribunal will allow them to charge more than $65 since they already agreed to waive it if you paid. Are the fines from one parking session or multiple? What do you mean by 3 errors? What information was taken when you paid for the parking, did they get your licence plate, if it was clear the car was paid for and it was just a typo that seems like negligence. A good thing is they already admitted your only fault was the typo and the charge is for admin work which means the fine that's claiming parking without paying is incorrect and cannot be used to compensate admin work. Show the debt collection agency the email removing your liability of what the fine is for therefore the fine has been proved incorrect and invalid. If you get a call or call them record the call. There is information here that can be useful https://www.moneyhub.co.nz/parking-tickets.html

    • Justmeasking on 12/02/2022 - 20:08

      So basically, their website for booking remembers details and it automatically generates my details. So whenever I book, it does it all for me which makes makes things easier rather than having to type my details everytime. When I recieved the first notice that's when I made aware of it, then I backed tracked and realised I made the errors 3 times all together.

      Yes they admitted it being a typo mistake only but at the same time I also admitted that if it does happen again, I will pay for my mistake. If they do argue it being negligence on my part, can I also agrue it them doing the same thing? The car park uses number plate recognition technology, so they encourage you to ensure you put in the correct rego. I mean how often does this happen that someone makes a mistake like this? They should have records of all the plates in their system that uses their car park previously so many times and shouldn't they have checked it in their side if the mistake could have been a genuin mistake? How much revenue they lose by this? Because they made it sound like they lost so much. The $65 payment would only be in effect if I agreed to paying it right away or otherwise I had to pay all 3.

      On top of all the car park fee I paid, I still have to pay them $65. Is that reasonable? If they claim it being admin work only is $6, then I could have offered to pay $18 all together, I wouldn't have minded that.

      Sorry Bill, too many questions. Also I had a looked at moneyhub parking tickets but their are still some areas I just need to cover. I'm about to take this to Disputes Tribunal, so I just want to make sure that I have things covered.

      • Bill on 13/02/2022 - 01:37
        +1

        What I am saying is if they see your licence plate is paid for it would be negligent to claim your car is unpaid for due to a different rego. You can't just only argue how much revenue they lost. $65 parking fines isn't outrageously unreasonable, your stance should be that it is not applicable to you as your car was paid for.

        I was saying considering they offered to waive the other 2 fines already it would be damn near impossible to claim they needed to reinstate them back. It should fall under some kind of illegal coercion. Before you file with the disputes tribunal it is very important to get in contact with the debt collection agency and explain the situation to them.

        I'm not too familiar with the disputes tribunal and whether you can claim compensation for emotional distress and duress due to their negligence but I would try to. You need to prove you were acting in a reasonable manner to try and resolve the situation and they were not being reasonable and unjust. Them not replying to your emails is very good for you to show your willingness to resolve and their uncooperative, unreasonable behaviour. The coercion would have caused you to be under duress and caused emotional distress as well.

  • Wakrak on 12/02/2022 - 20:34
    +1

    Geekzone might be another good place for you to post this if you want a bit more feedback.

  • CheapAzChips on 12/02/2022 - 22:22
    +2

    Disputes tribunal all the way. They're there for exactly this sort of daylight robbery. Parking infringement notice enforcement is notoriously unjust, and they will threaten and harass until either you pay up or make it hard for them. If you have a good case (and it sounds like you have a very good one), the disputes tribunal will help you get some justice. But as noted above, make sure you have everything in writing and be organised. Chances are they won't turn up to the hearing (in which case you win), but if they do you need to show you've done your homework. They do this sort of scumbaggery every day, so if they think they can win a case they'll fight it.

    Good luck… 😟

  • [Deactivated] on 12/02/2022 - 22:41

    Contact Stuff.co.nz either email [email protected] or try their 0800 788 335 number. They love these kinds of stories and if they decide to put yours on their site then chances are the parking company will suddenly become a bit more sympathetic once they're exposed. It's worth a try, and it's free.

  • kiwical on 13/02/2022 - 07:47

    Another vote for the Disputes Tribunal. It does sound like something they will help you with. They can't tell you if you will win or lose right there when you contact them. That's completely normal. Even if it's obvious you will win. That's up to the referee when they hear your claim. One small issue with the DT is that you can't claim your fee back, even if you win. It will cost you $45 to lodge a claim.

    For the DT it is important to have written records. So hopefully all this stuff being said about waiving the 2nd and 3rd incidents, admitting it was a typo etc is on email, not phone calls.

  • Senior Mouse on 13/02/2022 - 08:02
    +1

    Hi Justmeasking, I went through the process against Wilson / Parking Enforcement Services (for fun) ages ago here if you are interested:
    https://www.gpforums.co.nz/getting-out-of-parking-tickets-wi…

    I ain't no lawyer (@homegardener's territory), but their opinion of the above thread can be seen here:
    https://www.cheapies.nz/node/22466

    Gotta fight the power! (Fight the powers that be!)

  • Hedgehog on 13/02/2022 - 08:46

    Wot a lot of BS from this organisation. They actually lost nothing, you paid for your parking, have proven this. They have backed them self into a corner over your small error. Not sure that they would look great in the Fair Go spotlight. Good luck.

  • richms on 13/02/2022 - 11:36

    Dispute it. Clearly if the plate was recorded incorrectly three times its a problem with their system or entry method.

    You have paid, if their systems are failing to record that then it is on them to sort not you. Don't go into this acting like you have done something wrong, they should be capable of matching up the payment from what you have given them.

  • SpiltMilk on 13/02/2022 - 13:13
    +4

    OK, first things first - try to get calm. You are quite reasonably very stressed about this, but you will almost certainly be fine.

    1) It isn't very easy for them to enforce the ticket. This is not like a speeding fine issued by the NZ Police or a parking ticket issued by your local council. It's just a private business claiming that you owe them money. The referral to a debt collector doesn't change that - a debt collector cannot reach into your bank account and take your money. If you want to recover a debt, you actually have to go to the Disputes Tribunal or the court. I've been parking in Wilsons parks for years and haven't ever had this happen.
    2) lol, Honey Bees isn't the killer bee they are making it out to be. It has changed the law on penalty clauses from the previous position (which means a lot of the advice on MoneyHub and various forums is out of date, but it doesn't mean parking tickets are slam dunks now. Substantively, their case seems pretty weak. I understand from your post that you actually paid the relevant parking fee on all three occasions. Why is this relevant? First, if they ever actually went to the Disputes Tribunal, you'd probably get some sympathy points from the referee. But secondly, the whole idea of the Honey Bees Supreme Court case was that the court/tribunal should engage in a sort of 'proportionality' test - you basically look at the interest that the consequence in the contract is trying to support (compliance), and consider whether the consequence is "out of all proportion" to that interest - i.e. is it a legitimate incentive, or a money grab? If you hadn't paid and had no intention to do so (like me, roflmao) then maybe they'd have some argument there. But you'd actually paid the market rate, which is probably relevant to that proportionality test.
    3) They're seeking to rely on contractual fine print. At the very least, that requires adequate signage. I park at least once a week in a Wilson's park near my work that doesn't have adequate signage with the terms written on it. This is a prerequisite for a contract being formed, but also stipulated in the Code of Practice you refer to as well. Maybe have a look and see if the signage is actually there and can be seen clearly as you drive in by vehicle (e.g. not in a dark corner).
    4) Honey Bees also says "where there is evidence of unequal bargaining power, or where one party is not legally advised, a court will scrutinise more closely the innocent party’s claims as to the interests protected, and also the issue of proportionality" - it's not that the Court will let you get away with it because Wilson is a big company, but rather that the Tribunal/Court will take a thorough look and not necessarily accept the terms on the sign at first glance.

    In terms of practical way forward, I'd suggest emailing "[email protected]" and cc'ing in "[email protected]" (if Credit Consultants is the company they engaged). You might want to say something like:

    Kia ora,

    Further to previous correspondence with Wilson Parking and Credit Consultants, the breach notices that you have issued in respect of my vehicle [000XXX] are disputed.

    Your reference to the Honey Bees case on liquidated damages aside, the amount claimed is out of all proportion to the interest that Wilson Parking has in ensuring that people enter licence plate numbers into their automated machines without typographical errors. In particular, Wilson Parking can probably anticipate that this is likely to happen from time to time and is well placed to deal with that administrative problem and to build that minor cost into its overall pricing structure. As you have had the benefit of reading Honey Bees, you'll note that at paragraph [90] the Court found that "where there is evidence of unequal bargaining power, or where one party is not legally advised, a court will scrutinise more closely the innocent party’s claims as to the interests protected, and also the issue of proportionality". I am confident that if the Disputes Tribunal carried out that scrutiny here, the requirement to pay $65 (and the subsequent charges added on by Wilson Parking and by its debt collectors) would fail on the basis that it fails the proportionality test in Honey Bees and its therefore an unenforceable penalty.

    If you want to try to enforce your alleged debt, you will need to make an application to the Disputes Tribunal. Note that I will strongly oppose any such application.

    Any further contact from Wilson Parking, Parking Enforcement Services, or your debt collector will be ignored - and any attempt to contact any other person in an attempt to make contact with me will be the subject of a complaint to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.

    From,
    [name].

    Also, even though I am a lawyer, none of this should be taken as legal advice - all just helpful information and hot takes from a fellow Cheapies member.

    • Justmeasking on 14/02/2022 - 08:09

      Hi thank you for that,
      I've heard things about Wilson Parking, however this one is not. It's a different private car park in Sylvia Park.
      I just am not willing to pay another $65 on top of what I already paid for what is correctly reserved spot for me.
      One other thing to add, they sent me the notices with further incur charges (1 of them was well passed 14 days of supposed payment to make, the other two only gave me 3 days. So no time to little time to assess it). All 3 I recieved in the same day, 1 issued on the 10th of dec and the other 2 on the 17th of dec, all 3 I recieved on the 28th of dec. I know it was Christmas time but it shouldn't take more than 14 days for their letter to get to me, right?
      I took photos of the notices so that I would remember the dates when I got them.

      I think they intentionally sent it to me late? So I don't have time to argue it and then they can charge me more.

      Also, in their email response after I told them I would be taking them to the Disputes Tribunal, they said "all actions and cost are in proportion in accordance to the terms and condition on display in the car park. They believe the settlement made to me was extremely fair and reasonable."

      • SpiltMilk on 14/02/2022 - 09:28
        +1

        Ah, looks like Sylvia Park has their own parks, but they're monitored by Parking Enforcement Services, which is just another trading name of Wilson Parking.

        Just don't pay. It's that simple. Write to the company and say the debt is disputed, copy in the debt collectors. Remind the debt collectors whenever they contact that the debt is disputed.

        You don't need to take them to the disputes tribunal - they need to take you to the disputes tribunal, and it seems quiiiiite likely that they won't. The onus is on them to prove that you owe them money before they can actually do anything to you.

        • Justmeasking on 14/02/2022 - 13:56

          I've already told them, I'm taking them to the disputes tribunal and they are ok with that. They've provided me their organisation details as per my request. So I guess now I have to go ahead with it?

          • SpiltMilk on 14/02/2022 - 13:58
            +1

            @Justmeasking: You don't have to. You can just tell them that you've looked into it further, and identified that the onus is on them to prove that you owe them in a Disputes Tribunal if they want to enforce - and that the onus is not on you. You could tell them as well that the alleged debt is disputed. Hope that helps :)

    • akrotohur on 14/02/2022 - 08:38

      "a debt collector cannot reach into your bank account and take your money", but can they put a mark on OP's credit records?

      • Justmeasking on 14/02/2022 - 08:47

        So the car I was using was under someone else's name, all the notices I get is address to that person. What I'm afraid of is them giving bad credit to that person :(

        The parking company though knows it, I made them aware of it from the start.

      • SpiltMilk on 14/02/2022 - 09:30
        +1

        Nope, not if the debt is disputed.

        I suppose if OP was about to buy a house, or something, and wanted to be suuuuper careful, then maybe he'd like to prove he doesn't owe anything - and then in that case maybe he'd either pay or bring disputes tribunal proceedings himself.

        But if you've told the company the debt is disputed, they shouldn't be able to put it on your credit record even if they engage a debt collector - and if they do, you can request under Information Privacy Principle 7 in the Privacy Act 2020 that the information is corrected.

  • CheepCheepCheep on 14/02/2022 - 09:30
    +1

    "Report it to a TV show for resolution"

    Such a kiwi thing to do… What a sad state of affairs in this country that this is ever an option that people would genuinely consider taking.

    • kiwical on 15/02/2022 - 10:53

      I get what you are saying and it does get annoying. It's often the first thing people say "Go to Fair Go" Although it does seem like the kind of thing they would like. Personally I have had an issue resolved by Fair Go. Don't know if you were aware but they do behind the scenes stuff as well as that which makes it on air. Mine did make it on air. One dodgy car dealer is now gone from that profession……….

  • Wakrak on 15/02/2022 - 08:02

    Looks like you're getting some good advice over at Geekzone OP.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join