Tony Hetherington is Financial Mail on Sunday’s ace investigator, fighting readers corners, revealing the truth that lies behind closed doors and winning victories for those who have been left out-of-pocket. Find out how to contact him below.
Stalled: Curbs on parking firms were promised by Rishi Sunak
C.B. writes: I am in the same position as the reader whose letter about car park penalties you published recently.
I paid for the parking, and I proved I paid, but Euro Car Parks Limited are still trying to make me pay a penalty.
I am refusing and have told them I will see them in court. I will not pay the £170 they are demanding.
Tony Hetherington replies: You used the car park in Upper Parliament Street in Nottingham. The car park machine failed to issue a receipt but your credit card statement shows that you paid £15.50 which is the correct price for a 24-hour stay, according to signs placed there by the owner Euro Car Parks.
You explained all this as soon as you received a Parking Charge Notice demanding £100, which would be cut to £60 if you paid quickly.
But Euro Car Parks rejected your appeal with what looks like an automatically produced letter, saying you have breached its terms and conditions because ‘No valid payment-permit was purchased.’
In short, if you are right in what you say, then Euro Car Parks was demanding that you pay up because its own machine failed to give you a receipt. But when you pressed for an explanation of how your card statement could show that you paid £15.50 on that very day to Euro Car Parks, its response was to tell you that you now had to pay £100 or face debt collectors.
You have demanded that Euro Car Parks take you to court so you can defend yourself.
It has failed to do so, but now expects you to fork out £170 including costs.
I repeatedly asked Euro Car Parks to comment and to explain how the £15.50 payment can appear on your card statement, while at the same time you are accused of failing to pay.
The company has failed to offer any comment or explanation whatsoever.
It behaves as if it is enough to issue demands over and over again in the belief that drivers will pay up rather than face legal action.
And this is at the heart of the whole issue. Without referring to Euro Car Parks itself, you might well agree with this statement about car park firms: ‘There are a lot of rogue operators out there that are taking advantage of people. The signage is pretty poor, there’s inconsistent practices, they send very intimidating letters, and clearly they think there’s a game there.’
I suspect Euro Car Parks may decide that you are more trouble than you are worth, but if they do take you to court, please let me know. I shall be happy to report the outcome
Or how about this: ‘Those threatening letters, they look very legalistic, they are intimidating, they have to stop!’
And best of all: ‘While many of these parking companies operate responsibly, many do not, and some, frankly, have been running little more than thinly-veiled extortion rackets.’
All these comments are from one man, a junior Minister in the Government in 2018 – Rishi Sunak, now the occupant of 10 Downing Street.
He was promising legal changes including a fair code of practice, with offenders put out of business. Four years later, in 2022, the code of practice was launched. And four months after that, it was ‘temporarily’ withdrawn. Perhaps car park bosses are not the only rogue operators.
I suspect Euro Car Parks may decide that you are more trouble than you are worth, but if they do take you to court, please let me know. I shall be happy to report the outcome.
New shock after a shunt…
Ms P.A. writes: I was very interested to see your excellent article about the driver who was in an accident and was insured with Privilege, but received a County Court Judgment after solicitors for the other driver sued.
It has left me quite uneasy as I have just begun the same nightmare, though with my insurer Churchill.
Advice: Churchill told Ms P.A. to ignore a county court letter as the insurers would pay
Tony Hetherington replies: You had a minor accident when you hit the back of another car, and as you had a fully comprehensive policy, Churchill paid your own repair bill without delay.
You left it to Churchill to meet the other driver’s claim so it was a shock when you received a letter from the county court saying you were being sued for over £6,000 in repair bills plus a further £1,000 to cover interest, court fees and legal costs.
You rang Churchill and were told to ignore this as the insurers would pay. Then you were told that a defence had been filed with the court on your behalf.
And finally you were contacted by solicitors who introduced themselves as your lawyers, appointed by Churchill. But why would you need lawyers if Churchill was meeting the claim?
Churchill and Privilege are both part of the Direct Line group, so I asked officials there whether this pointed to a fault in their system.
They told me: ‘We have spoken to Ms A and explained that the claim has been settled in full. No County Court Judgements have been issued.’
This was only half the story though. Staff errors meant the other driver’s claim had only been partly paid, which is why you were sued. To make up for this, Churchill has now sent you £500.
Account shut – and a refund
R.H. writes: Scottish Power closed my electricity account and I cannot get any response from them.
For more than two months I have been telling them they have got the wrong address.
I am severely disabled and concerned about my electricity being cut off. They have even given me a refund of £235 which is not mine.
No reply: Scottish Power closed R.H.’s electricity account and he cannot get any response from them
Tony Hetherington replies: You live in a small community and your house is number 1 in your road. Nearby, in a different road but the same postcode, there is also a house which is number 1. And here is where the confusion began.
The other number 1 had been empty for a long time. When a new occupant moved in, he gave Scottish Power his house number and postcode.
Scottish Power told me: ‘This made it look like a new occupier was moving into Mr H’s address, and that prompted the closure of his account.’ Your account has now been reinstated and credited with £75 by way of saying sorry.
If you believe you are the victim of financial wrongdoing, write to Tony Hetherington at Financial Mail, 9 Derry Street, London W8 5HY or email [email protected]. Because of the high volume of enquiries, personal replies cannot be given. Please send only copies of original documents, which we regret cannot be returned.
