Devere Parking Services Ltd have apparently opened a new fatuous letter writing department, devoted to lying to motorists, spouting irrelevancies, pressurizing motorists even if they are disabled, and generally behaving in the way expected of the worst of the bottom feeding parking companies.
In this latest slight to motorists Devere have started to threaten motorists with legal action if they raise the issue at that the landowner contract may not be in order. Devere say they will take action for defamation which is of course ridiculous as a private letter between the two parties cannot be defamation.
In his dealings with parking companies The Prankster has found that the companies that complain loudest about contracts with landowners are usually the ones with something to hide. The Prankster therefore suggests that all appeals against tickets issued by Devere should question their contract with the landowner until such time as the issue has been proved either way.
In a bizarre twist in one letter Devere stated that the appeal was rejected, but that they would not issue a POPLA code as they could not be bothered to waste any more time. The parking charge was therefore cancelled.
Devere do not seem to have any grasp of contract law, regularly stating that the parking charge is a contract entered into for breach of contract. It is of course, not possible to enter into a contract merely for the purpose of breaching it.
Devere have also resorted to pressurising motorists, in one case saying they were disappointed in the attitude of a disabled motorist and his daughters for daring to appeal and investigate the breakdown of charges.
In a refreshing change from the majority of parking companies who have seen it necessary to lie that their charges are a genuine pre-estimate of loss, Devere flatly deny that their charge is anything to do with landowner costs or a pre-estimate of loss incurred by themselves of the landowner. As they also admit the charge is for a breach of conditions this makes them in violation of the British Parking Association Limited Code of Practice which states that charges for breach of contract must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss. No doubt somebody in charge at Devere will be along with the clue-bat later to educate the letter writer that they are fatally weakening any POPLA case.
Devere state that their charge is donated to the Castlepoint Disability Fund and that by refusing to pay their charge, the fund is the only loser. The Prankster suggests that if anyone want to donate to this fund they can do so directly, and use gift aid to increase their donation.
Lastly in one letter, Devere accuse the motorist of not writing it themself. It is of course, perfectly reasonable to get other people to write specialist letters. People get solicitors to do this all the time.
Sadly the British Parking Association Limited ignore this kind of behaviour and show no attempt to control the situation. This throws the whole industry into disrepute and makes a farce of the BPA Ltd's stated aim to raise standards in the industry.
If they cannot see what is going on in front of their face then it has to be questioned whether they are the right people to control their members. The Prankster seems to mange to unearth dodgy practices, time after time after time (after time after time) so it cannot be too difficult. Paying a few people to patrol the motoring forums and investigate might be a good start. Actually making the worst of the parking companies toe the line would be a good next step.
The Parking Prankster