Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: barnet driver on November 27, 2024, 04:02:05 pm
-
I hope this helps and would appreciate to hear back if this helps anyone
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
@b789
further to RF admission of inadequacies in the system as a whole it is further discredited at Barnet by the numerous "staff parking areas" which are grossly inadequately signed. so you can trigger anpr and enter a very large car park often stationary for lengthy periods then unwittingly enter staff only areas. to make things worse the parking areas behind A&E are administered by a different NHS dept. and PALs do not have any sway.
this admission by RF could help many people
-
save the email as a pdf, edit and post up.
or photograph edit and post up
-
Pretty damning evidence of their ability to frustrate any contract. Any chance you can show us the actual letter received?
I only received this in a email
-
Our sites are controlled by ANPR and register the length of time you stay and therefore payment is needed for that time, unfortunately the system will not pick up whether you have found a parking space or not and that is why the PCN was issued.
Pretty damning evidence of their ability to frustrate any contract. Any chance you can show us the actual letter received?
A copy of Royal Free parking services letter acknowledging the system's limitations and arranging for the cancellation of the PCN could potentially be used by others receiving PCNs from the same operator at the same location to argue frustration of contract or other defences. Frustration of contract occurs when unforeseen circumstances outside the control of the parties make the performance of the contract impossible or radically different from what was agreed.
In this case, if a driver is unable to park because no spaces are available, it can be argued that the fundamental purpose of the contract (to provide a parking space) was frustrated. The hospital's acknowledgment that the system does not differentiate between searching for a space and parking supports the argument that a contract to park could not have been properly performed.
The letter demonstrates that the system is flawed and creates unfair situations where drivers are penalised for circumstances beyond their control. This would strengthen an argument that any purported parking contract was frustrated because the driver was willing to comply with the terms but was physically unable to due to no fault of their own. The operator's reliance on such an inflexible system makes the contract inherently unfair and unenforceable.
The letter also supports an argument that the parking terms are unfair under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, particularly if the signage did not adequately explain that drivers could be charged even if they were unable to find a space. The operator uses a system that penalises drivers who cannot benefit from the service offered.
Anyone receiving a similar PCN could argue the operator is aware of the system's limitations (as evidenced by the letter). The same unfair situation applies to them (e.g., no spaces available, time spent searching counted as parking).
If the management cancelled the PCN for one person, it establishes precedent and undermines the operator's claim of fairness and enforceability.
However, there are some risks. The letter may contain personal or case-specific details. Any shared version would need redact such information to avoid privacy concerns.
The operator might argue the cancellation was a discretionary gesture rather than an acknowledgment of broader system flaws. To counter this, other affected drivers could combine this evidence with their own specific circumstances to demonstrate a pattern of unfair practices.
So, while the letter alone may not guarantee the success of other appeals/claims, it is a valuable piece of evidence highlighting systemic flaws and could significantly bolster arguments of frustration of contract or unfair terms. If someone in a similar situation wishes to use it, ensuring it is anonymised and paired with their own specific evidence will strengthen their case.
-
Excellent - Plan A works again. Good result! If you don't receive confirmation it has been cancelled then chase up.
-
This morning, I received this from Royal Free parking services, rf-tr.parkingrfl@nhs.net.
Dear ....
Our sites are controlled by ANPR and register the length of time you stay and therefore payment is needed for that time, unfortunately the system will not pick up whether you have found a parking space or not and that is why the PCN was issued. If you cannot find parking, you would need to find alternative parking. However as this is the first PCN issued to this vehicle I have cancelled it as a gesture of good will on this occasion and you will receive formal notification of this in due course.
-
What’s your rush? You have two weeks before the appeal deadline.
-
No answer from The hospital parking department yet.
Should I put in my own appeal?
-
the setup at Barnet is shocking. there are 2 types of payment. on arrival by app or on exit at payment machine.
ANPR on entry but can be stuck in carpark for over 20 mins waiting for traffic to move.
complaints to RF would be a good idea.
-
Barnet PALS was useless.
Royal Free parking services are more sensible: rf-tr.parkingrfl@nhs.net.
It is one of the ANPR cameras operated car park, where parking time is measured between entrance and exit shots without any evidence of actual parking.
PALS immediate responded suggesting I contact RF parking services with the email you provided.
I will update
-
Barnet PALS was useless.
Royal Free parking services are more sensible: rf-tr.parkingrfl@nhs.net.
It is one of the ANPR cameras operated car park, where parking time is measured between entrance and exit shots without any evidence of actual parking.
-
Delivery is deemed to be two working days after issue. So, it was deemed given on Monday 18th November.
Appeal deadline is Monday 16th December.
-
If someone could help be understand the appeal by date?
It says "appeals should be submitted within 28 days of the delivery of the parking charge"
What does that mean?
event date was 8.11.24
issue date was 14.11.24
date I received the letter was a couple of days later.
Until when can I appeal it?
-
Have you approached the PALS service to ask them to intervene and get it cancelled?
The "mugs discount" is there to get the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to capitulate and pay into the unregulated private parking operators coffers without them having to do a thing. Ka-ching! Another easy £60.
My advice is to ignore the mugs discount and get this cancelled by PALS. If you've not had a response from them by the appeal deadline, then come back for a suggested appeal and subsequent secondary appeal (ParkingEye will always reject an initial appeal) with POPLA.
Thank you.
I wrote to PALS and will update you
-
Have you approached the PALS service to ask them to intervene and get it cancelled?
The "mugs discount" is there to get the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to capitulate and pay into the unregulated private parking operators coffers without them having to do a thing. Ka-ching! Another easy £60.
My advice is to ignore the mugs discount and get this cancelled by PALS. If you've not had a response from them by the appeal deadline, then come back for a suggested appeal and subsequent secondary appeal (ParkingEye will always reject an initial appeal) with POPLA.
-
I have added the original letter they sent me
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I was waiting for my daughter in Barnet hospital. After giving up trying to find parking, as many others were, I just waited in the car park without leaving my car. For 39 minutes. Do I have any sort of case for appeal or should I pay the £60 which is the lower rate which tomorrow is the last day for.
Many thanks for all your help
[attachment deleted by admin]