PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Help Needed, Zipcar PCN! £145 fine
stevenl123
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:36
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Feb 2018
Member No.: 96,505



Hi there,

In advance of anyone replying to this, thanks for any input anyone has on this. Here is my situation. I have attached the NTO as well as better quality pictures I was able to get.

On Saturday Zipcar emailed me to inform me I had a PCN from my local council in relation to when I hired a car for 30 mins in early December. The PCN was in fact issued the next day, almost 16 hours after my reservation ended (unsure if this helps).

The PCN is for £130 + £15 admin fee for Zipcar. I picked up and dropped the car off in the same space. It turns out the bay was out of order for the day I hired and the following day (when ticket was issued). I used the app to book, unlock and end the reservation and at no point did it tell this to me. However, I have since learnt that my booking confirmation did have this information right at the bottom of the email, which I did not read due to booking it 15 mins prior to starting the trip. Photos do show the sign saying this but to be honest I did not notice this at all at the time, it was not clear really.

The PCN was issued on 8th December and I only found out now and thus missed the window for 50% discount. This was only due to ZIpcar not telling me which they are claiming is because they only round out as they received a Notice to Owner from the council.

I feel that this is highly unfair mainly as it was not made clear at the time of booking via the app (bottom of an email isn't clear in my view) and secondly due to the long delay resulting in the fine doubling.

I have sent one email asking about the 14 days bit and their response was this:

"In regards to the PCN being at the full rate, when a PCN is first issued and placed on the vehicle there is usually a 14 day window within which a reduced rate of 50% is payable.

If a ticket is found on the vehicle by a member, and we are made aware, we do all we can to alert the member responsible and give them the opportunity to either appeal or pay at the reduced rate.

Unfortunately as we were unaware of this PCN until the Notice To Owner was sent to us, by which time the window for the reduced rate had closed, we were not able to inform you until the full rate of £130 was due.

I understand that this is a frustrating situation, but we need you to remember that PCNs are not issued by Zipcar, but by the local authority. We try to accommodate our members as best we can, but we, as a company need to recover the costs of these fines from the members responsible."

Long story short, is there anything I can do to avoid paying this PCN? I feel it is unfair and normally would pay these sorts of things if I felt I had intentionally been at fault.

Thanks again.

This post has been edited by stevenl123: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:09
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
 

Attached File(s)
Attached File  WA78933077_3.pdf ( 1.47MB ) Number of downloads: 22
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 39)
Advertisement
post Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:36
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 14:58
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



OP, give us a chance pl.

Don't tell us what the email contained, post it in its entirety less your personal details. Leave in all dates.

Saturday Zipcar emailed me to inform me I had a PCN from my local council in relation to when I hired a car for 30 mins in early December.

When you post this we can stop guessing.

What we do know is that a NTO issued 11 Jan had a 28-day period for payment and reps which ended on Sun. 11 Feb. So let's hope they did something or this could get messy.

Their email please.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 17:38
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,305
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (stevenl123 @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:36) *
On Saturday Zipcar emailed me to inform me I had a PCN from my local council in relation to when I hired a car for 30 mins in early December. The PCN was in fact issued the next day, almost 16 hours after my reservation ended (unsure if this helps).

You don't have a PCN, Zipcar do. Tell them to appeal the NTO by using ground D on the second page (We are a hire firm...). The council will cancel the NtO and send a new one to you, this will then give you the option to pay (with the 50% discount if paid in the 14 day period) or make representations.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Irksome
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:28
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 269
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
From: sw11
Member No.: 38,303



From ZipCar T&C's

QUOTE
Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations, is sent directly to Zipcar, Zipcar will either pay the penalty/fee on
behalf of the Member and then add the penalty/fee to the Member's account or Zipcar may, if
permitted by the authority issuing the violation, transfer liability for the penalty/fee notice to the
Member and the Member will then be wholly responsible for all correspondence with the appropriate
authority and any penalties/fees due. Zipcar will always inform a Member which one of these two
courses of action it has taken, and will endeavour to provide notice to Members before it pays any
penalties/fees attributable to them. Once paid by Zipcar, it may not be possible for the Member to
challenge the penalty/fee. The right to appeal, or transfer liability, on any traffic or parking charge
18
issued by any authority or body belongs to Zipcar and will be at Zipcar's absolute discretion. In the
case of speeding notices or traffic violations, Zipcar is obliged by law to pass on the offending
Member's details to the police who will then contact the Member directly.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:42
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,305
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Irksome @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 19:28) *
From ZipCar T&C's

QUOTE
Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations, is sent directly to Zipcar, Zipcar will either pay the penalty/fee on
behalf of the Member and then add the penalty/fee to the Member's account or Zipcar may, if
permitted by the authority issuing the violation, transfer liability for the penalty/fee notice to the
Member and the Member will then be wholly responsible for all correspondence with the appropriate
authority and any penalties/fees due. Zipcar will always inform a Member which one of these two
courses of action it has taken, and will endeavour to provide notice to Members before it pays any
penalties/fees attributable to them. Once paid by Zipcar, it may not be possible for the Member to
challenge the penalty/fee. The right to appeal, or transfer liability, on any traffic or parking charge
18
issued by any authority or body belongs to Zipcar and will be at Zipcar's absolute discretion. In the
case of speeding notices or traffic violations, Zipcar is obliged by law to pass on the offending
Member's details to the police who will then contact the Member directly.


This is completely illegal, for the reasons I explained here: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...p;#entry1354748


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 21:41
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



It is not unlawful for those reasons and there's no case as such for 'telling them to make reps', what contractual provision either express or implied allows this? The company may pay or they may transfer at their discretion.

But what trumps their discretion is their duty to mitigate their losses and it is their burden to do this. And there is an argument that if they treat all cases as one-size-fits-all, then they are not attempting to mitigate their losses but simply passing the maximum cost to the hiree.

Any dispute would turn on its own facts.

And we're still waiting to see the email!

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 21:43
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:11
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 17:38) *
QUOTE (stevenl123 @ Mon, 12 Feb 2018 - 23:36) *
On Saturday Zipcar emailed me to inform me I had a PCN from my local council in relation to when I hired a car for 30 mins in early December. The PCN was in fact issued the next day, almost 16 hours after my reservation ended (unsure if this helps).

You don't have a PCN, Zipcar do. Tell them to appeal the NTO by using ground D on the second page (We are a hire firm...). The council will cancel the NtO and send a new one to you, this will then give you the option to pay (with the 50% discount if paid in the 14 day period) or make representations.



A NtO is a demand for full payment, there is no 50% discount on offer. The council has 6 months from the date the NtO is cancelled to re-serve it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:17
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,305
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 21:41) *
It is not unlawful for those reasons and there's no case as such for 'telling them to make reps', what contractual provision either express or implied allows this? The company may pay or they may transfer at their discretion.

Zipcar may pay at their own expense, or may transfer liability.

It is however unlawful for them to decide if the OP should end up paying the penalty "in their absolute discretion", while quashing the OP's right of access to the tribunal system. The common law rights of access to the courts, the Consumer Rights Act and article 6 ECHR are all capable of over-riding the terms and conditions of a private contractual agreement.



--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:31
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 21:41) *
It is not unlawful for those reasons and there's no case as such for 'telling them to make reps', what contractual provision either express or implied allows this? The company may pay or they may transfer at their discretion.

But what trumps their discretion is their duty to mitigate their losses and it is their burden to do this. And there is an argument that if they treat all cases as one-size-fits-all, then they are not attempting to mitigate their losses but simply passing the maximum cost to the hiree.

Any dispute would turn on its own facts.

And we're still waiting to see the email!



Mitigate their losses does not enter the equation. They either pay, or make reps. Period. End of.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,392
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:34
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,305
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32) *
The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.

Well we're obviously going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Without repeating the points I've made elsewhere, I simply do not believe the courts would agree that the contractual term you mention is lawful.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:38
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32) *
The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.



Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations,

Only a PA can decide if a 'violation' occurred. The contract is unenforceable. The only sensible approach is for the contract to state that Avis
will transfer liability and wash its hands. Avis has no discretion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:41
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,304
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32) *
The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.



Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations,

Only a PA can decide if a 'violation' occurred. The contract is unenforceable. The only sensible approach is for the contract to state that Avis
will transfer liability and wash its hands. Avis has no discretion.


That seems to be a valid point
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:44
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:41) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32) *
The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.



Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations,

Only a PA can decide if a 'violation' occurred. The contract is unenforceable. The only sensible approach is for the contract to state that Avis
will transfer liability and wash its hands. Avis has no discretion.


That seems to be a valid point


Indeed, it is unanswerable. Parliament has put in place a scheme for transferring liability (or paying). Mitigating losses is irrelevant.

The interesting point is what happens if the vehicle is towed and the member (who hired the car) then refuses to pay/disappears.
Then what? Does Avis pay, if it does it cannot transfer liability. So it is stuck with the bill or the car rotting in the pound.

This post has been edited by 4101: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:45
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:45
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,305
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
Only a PA can decide if a 'violation' occurred. The contract is unenforceable. The only sensible approach is for the contract to state that Avis
will transfer liability and wash its hands. Avis has no discretion.

I wouldn't take it that far, I think Avis can pay the penalty themselves, or transfer liability, that's it. If they however pay the charge themselves, they cannot then claim it back from the hirer, which is the key point.

QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:44) *
The interesting point is what happens if the vehicle is towed and the member (who hired the car) then refuses to pay/disappears.
Then what? Does Avis pay, if it does it cannot transfer liability. So it is stuck with the bill or the car rotting in the pound.

One of the flame pit I would suggest, we don't want to lose the OP's interest after all.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:47
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,304
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:44) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:41) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32) *
The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.



Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations,

Only a PA can decide if a 'violation' occurred. The contract is unenforceable. The only sensible approach is for the contract to state that Avis
will transfer liability and wash its hands. Avis has no discretion.


That seems to be a valid point


Indeed, it is unanswerable. Parliament has put in place a scheme for transferring liability (or paying).

The interesting point is what happens if the vehicle is towed and the member (who hired the car) then refuses to pay/disappears.
Then what? Does Avis pay, if it does it cannot transfer liability.


But once Avis pay the PCN is closed, so if they charge the OPs card then it would need be a civil claim. In that situation i would instigate a charge back and let avis take the action
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:50
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,305
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:47) *
But once Avis pay the PCN is closed, so if they charge the OPs card then it would need be a civil claim. In that situation i would instigate a charge back and let avis take the action

I would do the same, and if for whatever reason a charge back were not possible, I'd issue a claim in the County Court (small claims track).


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:55
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:47) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:44) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:41) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32) *
The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.



Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations,

Only a PA can decide if a 'violation' occurred. The contract is unenforceable. The only sensible approach is for the contract to state that Avis
will transfer liability and wash its hands. Avis has no discretion.


That seems to be a valid point


Indeed, it is unanswerable. Parliament has put in place a scheme for transferring liability (or paying).

The interesting point is what happens if the vehicle is towed and the member (who hired the car) then refuses to pay/disappears.
Then what? Does Avis pay, if it does it cannot transfer liability.


But once Avis pay the PCN is closed, so if they charge the OPs card then it would need be a civil claim. In that situation i would instigate a charge back and let avis take the action


The PCN is not closed Avis can make formal reps, but this does not include transfer as a hire firm. This is only available after a NtO is served.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:59
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 12,304
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:55) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:47) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:44) *
QUOTE (PASTMYBEST @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:41) *
QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:38) *
QUOTE (hcandersen @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:32) *
The OP is not being required to pay the penalty by the company.

The company pay the penalty because it is being demanded of them. Them, not the OP, them. And it is then a cost to their business. And the contract then provides for them to recover this as a charge under the contract. And to do so unilaterally, subject of course to mitigating its degree.



Where a violation, incurred during the Member's reservation period or after it as a result of failure to
adhere to parking regulations,

Only a PA can decide if a 'violation' occurred. The contract is unenforceable. The only sensible approach is for the contract to state that Avis
will transfer liability and wash its hands. Avis has no discretion.


That seems to be a valid point


Indeed, it is unanswerable. Parliament has put in place a scheme for transferring liability (or paying).

The interesting point is what happens if the vehicle is towed and the member (who hired the car) then refuses to pay/disappears.
Then what? Does Avis pay, if it does it cannot transfer liability.


But once Avis pay the PCN is closed, so if they charge the OPs card then it would need be a civil claim. In that situation i would instigate a charge back and let avis take the action


The PCN is not closed Avis can make formal reps, but this does not include transfer as a hire firm. This is only available after a NtO is served.


Avis do not become aware until the NTO They can make reps, they should make reps but do they. If they pay it is closed
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4101
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:01
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 19 Dec 2017
Member No.: 95,634



No, if the car is impounded and Avis gets a NtO it then tries to transfer liability and that is accepted the vehicle is still impounded because the release fee has not been paid.

All that would happen is a new NtO would be sent to the member, and Avis is still without a car.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 23:03
Post #40


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,671
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (4101 @ Tue, 13 Feb 2018 - 22:55) *
The PCN is not closed Avis can make formal reps, but this does not include transfer as a hire firm. This is only available after a NtO is served.

Has been served, obviously.


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Wednesday, 23rd May 2018 - 18:48
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.