Free Traffic Legal Advice

Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 02:44:04 pm

Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 17, 2024, 03:36:17 pm
Absolutely amazing. Thank you so much, you're right this is a life changer!
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 17, 2024, 03:06:11 pm
Here is a suggested appeal to POPLA which must be made for each PCN appeal rejection you receive from ECP:

Quote
POPLA Verification Code: [insert code]
Vehicle Registration Number (VRN): [insert VRN]
Parking Charge Notice (PCN) Reference: [insert reference]
Operator Name: [insert operator]
Appellant Hirer: [Your Name, as the Hirer]
Appeal Reason: Non-compliance with Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012, Schedule 4, Paragraph 142(a)

I am appealing the above-referenced Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as the hirer of the vehicle. The operator has failed to fully comply with the strict requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4, specifically Paragraph 14(2)(a), in relation to the transfer of liability from the vehicle-hire company to me, the hirer.

Non-Compliance with PoFA 2012, Schedule 4, Paragraph 14(2)(a)

The Notice to Hirer (NtH) issued by Euro Car Parks does not comply with the mandatory requirements of PoFA 2012, Schedule 4. To hold me liable as the hirer, the operator must meet all the conditions set out in Paragraph 14(2)(a) of PoFA. This section explicitly states that the parking operator must include the following documents with the NtH:

A statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time, the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;
A copy of the hire agreement; and
A copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under the hire agreement.
In this case, [operator name] did not provide any of the required documents with the NtH. Specifically:

• I did not receive a statement from the vehicle-hire firm confirming that the vehicle was on hire to me at the time of the alleged parking event.
• I did not receive a copy of the hire agreement.
• I did not receive a signed statement of liability from the hire agreement.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

PoFA 2012 is clear that if the parking operator does not meet all of these requirements, they cannot transfer liability for the alleged parking charge from the vehicle-hire company to the hirer. In this situation, they can only pursue the driver for the alleged parking charge.

The burden of proof lies entirely with the operator to demonstrate that the hirer was the driver at the time of the alleged contravention. No assumptions or inferences can be made, and I, as the hirer, am under no legal obligation to disclose the driver’s identity to an unregulated private parking company. Without evidence to show that I was the driver, the operator has no basis to hold me liable.

Material Change to Terms and Conditions Without Notification

In addition to the operator's non-compliance with PoFA, ECP has also breached the requirements set out in Section 19.10 of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice (CoP), which states:

"Where there is any material change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a motorist entering controlled land that is or has been open for public parking, you must place additional (temporary) notices at the site entrance for a period of not less than 4 months from the date of the change making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who might be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur parking charges."

The driver has been a regular, almost daily user of the car park for over 18 months. The PCNs were issued because a material change in the parking tariff was not adequately brought to the driver’s attention. ECP failed to provide any temporary signage to alert regular users of the change, despite the requirements of the BPA CoP. Regular users like the driver, who were familiar with the previous terms, could not reasonably be expected to notice the new conditions without proper notification.

I put ECP to strict proof that they complied with this requirement of the BPA CoP by producing dated photographs of the entrance signage and evidence that temporary notices were displayed for a period of at least 4 months from the date of the change.

Failure to provide such evidence should result in the PCN being cancelled due to non-compliance with the BPA CoP. Shown here is the difference between the original and the material change to the sign that caused the alleged breach of contract:

(https://i.imgur.com/1dSBWfp.jpeg)

Conclusion

To summarise, the appeal is based on the following points:

1. The operator has failed to comply with PoFA 2012, Schedule 4, Paragraph 14(2)(a), by not providing the required documents alongside the Notice to Hirer (NtH). Without these documents, liability cannot be transferred to the hirer, and the operator can only pursue the driver. As no evidence has been provided to show the driver’s identity, the PCN must be cancelled.

2. The operator has breached Section 19.10 of the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) by failing to notify regular users, including the driver, of a material change in the terms and conditions. The absence of temporary signage at the entrance of the car park for the required period renders the PCN invalid. ECP is put to strict proof that they complied with this requirement.
Given these significant failings, it is requested that POPLA upholds this appeal and instructs ECP to cancel the Parking Charge Notice.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 17, 2024, 01:08:46 pm
Thank you. Is there anything else you need from me?
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 17, 2024, 10:57:09 am
yes
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 17, 2024, 07:55:39 am
That's great. It was mentioned earlier that ' a more expanded upon version will form one part of each of your POPLA appeals.' Is that something you can help with?
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 17, 2024, 01:08:13 am
So, was there any copies of the required documents with each of those NtH?

I’m assuming not which means that each POPLA appeal will be identical and based on the fact that the Keeper cannot be liable as the operator has not complied with the requirements of PoFA paragraph 13. There is no legal obligation for the Hirer to identify the driver and no inference or assumption can be made. The burden of proof of who the driver was is on the operator.

You have 33 days from the initial appeal rejection date to submit a POPLA appeal.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 16, 2024, 08:42:08 pm
13/08/24

(https://i.imgur.com/crtfX2S.jpeg)

27/08/24

(https://i.imgur.com/xs2t20r.jpeg)

10/09/24

(https://i.imgur.com/uTtbIar.jpeg)

17/09/24
 That was the one earlier, but I'm struggling to find that original share link
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 15, 2024, 03:43:19 pm
So, we need to know the dates of each NtK you received. The one you have shown is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA to be able to hold the Keeper liable. However, all the others may not be the same.

So, please list each NtK in chronological order of the date of the alleged contravention and show alongside that date the "date issued" of that NtK.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 15, 2024, 03:32:20 pm
I appealed all of them with that same statement I provided earlier.
Only 1 of them so far has been rejected by Euro Car Parks which has resulted in a POPLA reference to appeal to them. I've not heard anything back from any of the other initial appeals to Euro Car Parks. I've not appealed to POPLA yet as I came here first and I've been waiting for assistance before starting that process. So 5 of the charges are still being appealed with Euro Car Parks and 1 of them has been rejected by ECP and is awaiting to be appealed with POPLA
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: DWMB2 on October 15, 2024, 03:27:19 pm
No - the text b789 has shared is for your initial appeals to the operator. If you have already appealed them all, then a more expanded upon version will form one part of each of your POPLA appeals.

Can you confirm what stage each charge is up to?
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 15, 2024, 03:25:50 pm
One more thing, does that go to POPLA? They're only rejected one appeal so far, but I expect more as it's the same incident
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 15, 2024, 03:24:46 pm
Fantastic. Thank you so much again, I can't thank you enough
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 15, 2024, 03:23:39 pm
Good. Easy one to defeat... as long as the unknown drivers identity is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the known Hirer (the recipient of the Notice to Hirer (NtHK)) to reveal the identity of the unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.

The NtH is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA which means that if the unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the unknown driver to the known Hirer.

Use the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:

Quote
I am the Hirer of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

As your Notice to Hirer (NtH) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the Hirer of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. ECP has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.

The Hirer cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtH can only hold the driver liable. ECP have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 15, 2024, 03:13:55 pm
No. The only thing I got from the notice to hirer was the redacted sheet I posted earlier and on the back of it is a generic terms which I've included below
(https://i.imgur.com/PbITOIb.jpeg)
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 15, 2024, 03:05:48 pm
OK. So you have not identified as the driver, whether you were or not. That is good.

Now, please answer the other question about the copies of the documents that were included with the Nth.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 15, 2024, 02:48:09 pm
Ah, in that case yes I reffered to her as 'my wife'. I identified as hirer/lease on the initial drop down
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: DWMB2 on October 15, 2024, 02:43:03 pm
If you said "my wife" that is similarly not identifying the driver - this would only be an issue if you said "my wife, thegirltaff, who lives at [address]"
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 15, 2024, 02:38:00 pm
I don't understand what you mean by "subbed" for the driver. It does not matter if you said your wife was driving. The NtH is addressed to you, the Hirer (I presume). The content of your appeal is OK. It does not reveal that you, the Hirer was driving, irrespective of whether you were or not

My question was about when you submitted that appeal, there is usually some drop down menus or options to tick or say in what capacity you are appealing, i.e. as "the driver", the "keeper", the "hirer" or whatever. What exactly did you select when submitting your original appeal?

There is no legal obligation on the Hirer/Keeper to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company and no inference can be taken from that.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 15, 2024, 02:29:58 pm
I subbed 'the driver' for what I actually put which was my relation to the driver. I'm the hirer, but I didn't think I could put that relation here so subbed it. But for everywhere you see the driver, it would have said my 'relation'. Sadly I sent the challenge before I even discovered this forum :-(
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 15, 2024, 02:25:56 pm
When you appealed, did you select anything that would admit to the Hirer being the driver?

However, given that the appeal was from the Hirer, it does not identify the hirer as the driver. That appeal maintains a clear distinction between the hirer and the driver by consistently referring to "the driver" in the third person and even specifying that "my wife" was the driver. This maintains the hirer's position as separate from the driver and does not suggest that the hirer was the one driving the vehicle at the time of the parking incident.

When the Notice to Hirer was received, did it also contain copies of these documents:

• a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;

• a copy of the hire agreement; and

• a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.

If it didn't (and I've yet to see an NtH that does) and as long as the Hirer has not identified as the driver, the Hirer cannot be liable for the charge as by failing to include copies of those documents, the NtH is not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA.

So, has the Hirer been identified as the driver when submitting the appeal and did the NtH include the copies of the required documents?
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 15, 2024, 01:47:01 pm
Here's the PCN notice. Sorry about the delay, I didn't get back home until late last night

(https://i.imgur.com/whDaStJ.jpeg)

And this is what I put in the appeal

I am writing to formally challenge the parking fine issued on 17/09/2024 at Birkenhead Hamilton Square. I believe this penalty is unjustified due to the following reasons, and I kindly request that you cancel this fine.

The driver has been a regular user of your car park for over a year. They follows the same routine each time, parking the car, entering the registration number, and paying for the ticket via their card. For the past year, the standard charge for 24 hours has been £2.60, and this is the amount they paid on the day in question, assuming the same tariff applied.

However, I have since learned that a new tariff structure has been introduced, with the minimum payment of £2.00 covering only 4 hours, and the cost for 24 hours now being £2.80. While the signs may have changed to reflect this, I believe it was not made sufficiently clear to regular users, like my wife, that these changes had taken effect.

As a frequent user of the car park, the driver had no reason to check the signage daily, since they believed they were familiar with the parking fees. The new structure, particularly the introduction of a 4-hour minimum, represents a significant change that was not adequately communicated to loyal customers. This lack of clarity led to an honest mistake on their part.

I have attached two photos that show both the old tariff and the new one. The differences are subtle but important, and I believe that more proactive efforts should have been made to alert regular users of the change—either through clearer signage, or an additional notice.

Given the circumstances, I kindly request that this fine be reconsidered and canceled, as it seems unreasonable to penalise a customer for an unintentional oversight caused by an insufficiently communicated change in pricing.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 11, 2024, 06:59:37 pm
It will be a life learning experience for you. Can you show us one of the Notices ti Keeper (NtK) redacting only your personal details, the PCN number and your VRM. We need to see all dates and times and the location information.

Also, can you show us exactly what you put in your appeal to ECP. Once we've seen that, we can put together a POPLA appeal where this should be cancelled.

Even if POPLA do not accept an appeal (they are beholden to their paymasters, the very companies they are adjudicating on) it means nothing and this will lead to a county court claim where, I can claim with 99% certainty, the case will wither be struck out or discontinued. Even if you were a 1 percent that made it all the way to a hearing, it would win.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 06:44:11 pm
I appealed with Euro Car Parks and so far they've responded to 1 appeal and rejected it. I'm expecting them to reject the rest as it's the same appeal for each individual charge. I wasn't aware of some of the additional reasoning such as the BPA code of practice. Apparently my next step is to appeal with POPLA, but I'd lean on your guidance as this is a whole new world to me
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 11, 2024, 06:21:41 pm
That's great. Have you appealed any of those PCNs yet? Have you tried to get the landowner to get the the PCNs cancelled
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 06:08:59 pm
Yes, I also have metadata on those original photos, showing the date of the original machine and then at a later date when they put the new price over it. The last photos were all taken today and have the metadata for that
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 06:06:39 pm
I've managed to get the additional pictures

Here is the front of the car park. It only shows the new 24 hour rate, but doesn't show anything about them introducing a new 4 hour rate that is the default payment when getting the ticket

(https://i.imgur.com/fXvhDkm.jpeg)

Nothing on the gate either...

(https://i.imgur.com/GwPdSo5.jpeg)

Wider shot of the payment machine

(https://i.imgur.com/GYe9Dy7.jpeg)

Ultimately, a ticket was bought every day as per usual but because the default payment was for a 24 hour slot they introduced a new payment scheme including a raise in the 24 hour price but also a minimum payment for 4 hours which is what the machine defaults at.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: b789 on October 11, 2024, 05:57:01 pm
Those two photos are excellent evidence of their failure to comply with the BPA CoP section 19.10. Do you have the metadata of them so that the dates they were taken can be evidenced?

Just posting them together, side by side:

(https://i.imgur.com/dox8emo.jpeg)

Simply a sticker over the previous tariffs and no notification of any material change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a motorist entering controlled land that is or has been open for public parking.

Those signs also fail PoFA requirements, BPA requirements and the CRA 2015.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 03:55:24 pm
I'm away this weekend, but I'll get that including the entrance when I'm back on Monday. I really appreciate all this help, thanks again
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: DWMB2 on October 11, 2024, 03:53:35 pm
Getting some wider pictures showing the entrance and rest of the site would also be useful, to show the lack of prominent notice that the terms have changed.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 03:41:35 pm
Apologies, I'm having a very bad Friday. I think I've got it now...

Here's the picture of before

http://(https://i.imgur.com/qnpM9Gz.jpeg)

Here's what changed

http://(https://i.imgur.com/znQ2VIl.jpeg)
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: DWMB2 on October 11, 2024, 03:33:53 pm
You don't need to register for an account with Imgur in order to upload there.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 03:32:47 pm
Yes, I did read it but was having problems setting up an account with imgur. I was looking at an alternative, but I got called onto something with work. I'll get it done now
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: DWMB2 on October 11, 2024, 03:29:35 pm
I do have photos but they seem to be too large to add to this post.
If you read the "READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide" I linked to in my previous reply, this explains how to add images to your posts via a third party to avoid this issue.
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 03:25:35 pm
Apologies, I've appealed all but only had the 1 rejection so far but I anticipate the others to be rejected as it's the same appeal for each ticket.
There is no signage on the entrance or any other area of the car park, the only change is on the machine board. I do have photos but they seem to be too large to add to this post. This change only happened a month ago so I'll be able to get a photo of the main entrance as there is still no sign up and it's been less than 4 months since they implemented it
Title: Re: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: DWMB2 on October 11, 2024, 02:58:09 pm
To help us help you, please read the following thread carefully, and provide as much of the information it asks for as you are able to: READ THIS FIRST - Private Parking Charges Forum guide (https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/)

Also, to confirm, have you appealed each of the 6 charges and therefore received 6 POPLA codes?

Photos of the signage at the site will be key here, so get as many as you can - it would seem they have not complied with the below requirement from the BPA Code of Practice (https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/Version91.2.2024.pdf), which you will need to demonstrate:

19.10 Where there is any material change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a motorist entering controlled land that is or has been open for public parking, you must place additional (temporary) notices at the site entrance for a period of not less than 4 months from the date of the change making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who might be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur parking charges.
Title: Euro Car Parks - change of min stay and increase in cost
Post by: theboytaff on October 11, 2024, 02:44:04 pm
Hi,

The driver has been parking in the same Euro Car Park for the past 18 months or so. It has an ANPR system and when you approach the ticket machine, the charge was £2.60 for 24 hours. The driver would enter their registration and tap her card and when the ticket has been printed place this on the windscreen.
At some point, this was changed and it now has a 4 hour stay for £2.00 and a 24 hour stay for £2.80. The default selection was for 4 hours and the driver simply continued the same process and entered her registration and tapped the car against the machine. They didn't look at the ticket as they have been doing this same process for the last 18 months. There was only a slight variant of the costs on the notice board with no other notification that fees had changed. They've now sent me 6 charges of £100 each. I appealed this by explaining that there was minimal updated info to users, especially users who have been long term parkers and would have no need to check the prices every day. I also highlighted that they introduced a 4 hour stay as the minimum stay, the driver did pay for a ticket each time but wasn't aware that it was for only 4 hours and not the previous 24 hours.
Euro Car Parks have replied rejecting the appeal and telling me that I will need to raise this with POPLA. Does anyone have any advice on how I should raise the appeal? I absolutely can't afford to £600 on parking fees for this, so any help would really be appreciated.

Thanks