Free Traffic Legal Advice

Quote from: owen243 on July 16, 2024, 01:45:23 pm

You reckon i should just pay the £100 and count my losses? Im just a bit upset that a condition i had which affects my cognitive decision making means nothing to those b****ds and the fact that they are effectively 'above the law' as they stated to me when i rang them and they said they don't have to adhere to Road Traffic laws as its private land.

Im getting a little angsty purely because if they send court letters and im out of the country with my family the whole of October and CCJ's stay on record for so long too.

Absolutely not! No one is telling you to pay. You don't run the risk of a CCJ either even if you were unfortunate enough to lose, should it ever get that far. As already stated, P4 are not litigious. It is doubtful they will ever proceed all the way to a court claim.

Even they did, there is whole process to be followed before they can. They need to send you a Letter of Claim which gives you at least 30 days to respond before they can issue a claim. If you wanted to, you could extend that mandatory 30 days by another mandatory 30 days by responding to their LoC with notice that you are seeking debt advice and require an additional 30 days to do so and you would just send that on day 29 or day 30 after the LoC was sent.

Once that has been done, they can issue a claim at any time after the 30 or 60 days. Once a claim is issued, it is "deemed" served 5 days after the "issue date". You would have another 14 days to acknowledge the claim (AoS). Once you have done the AoS, you would then have 28 days (plus any weekend or bank holidays if the 28th day falls on one of those) from the "deemed" date of service to submit your defence which is provided as a template with minimal tweaking required.

After the defence is submitted and the claimant has responded, you would wait for the CNBC to send out a Directions Questionnaire (DQ) where you would indicate any dates in the next 6 months that you would be unavailable to attend a hearing after which another lengthy period of time, the claim would be allocated to a county court local to you and then another period of time before the local county court would allocate a date for a hearing.

Normal timescale from rejection of final appeal to actually getting to court (if ever) is around 9-12 months minimum. So, even if you are away for a whole month in October, you have time to prepare for one, Justin case, even if it means a family member checking your post once a week while you are away and you would have had to have received an LoC around the beginning of September to be in danger of missing a claim form. You would only need to submit a debt advice response just before you go away to put that one to bed.

However, all the above is academic as you'd be the first victim to be taken to court by P4 for your sins. Unlikely but forwarned is forearmed.

You have not only calmed me, but my wife as well as she's been on edge about this too whereas i want to stand by what i believe in.

Thank you so much b789. I owe you

Thanks for the diagram.

Do you think that 'As my bay is away from the house and i was 1 minute from home, i decided to park outside my house..' really provides a reason? Sorry to be pointed, but for all anyone knows a space in area 3 right opposite where you parked was available and you drove past it.

Be that as it may, IMO they would be unlikely to succeed in court.

If you read their responses it seems as if they are acting as enforcer for the landowner whose 'policies' and 'regulations' are the basis for their actions, not a contract between your and P4P.

Surely you must have something from the landowner or their agent regarding estate management fees and their scope and the rules which you must follow within the estate and similarly the rights conferred on you.

We get ticketed if we park in the wrong bays too. Also when im low on sugar (hypoglacemic) i can't really fully think straight and the only thing i wanted to do was quickly get home, unlock the door and get some carbs in me. I wasn't even neglecting the policy around the area.

I emailed Bellway asking for what arrangements they had in place but they told me to contact PM-UK who are the management company (Who contract P4PARKING to enforce parking) in the area. So im being swung around the roundabout at the moment from both companies.

Quote from: owen243 on July 16, 2024, 01:42:43 pm

1 - My property
2-6 - Parking bays for all other properties (Mine is one bay in 3)
7 - Outside my property there is a tiny pavement before its brick roads. I parked right outside my property (1) which there is no bay.

I can't see your scans (firewall issue) but it seems your saying it's not included in your freehold so must presumably come under an easement?

Ah Damn

I guess so. Ive read "easements" briefly so im only going by my understanding of

- My property line is up until where the pavement starts
- I parked on the pavement right outside my property away from my Bay (And waited 45 minutes until my Sugar returned to normal range to move the car as advised by the DVLA)

Quote from: The Rookie on July 16, 2024, 11:01:09 am

Quote from: owen243 on July 16, 2024, 10:34:25 am

No i was parked outside which the land is not owned by me.

I think I know what you mean, but that's gibberish and includes a probably accidental double negative to boot.

AND?

Sorry i missed your post before B789, my apologies.

https://imgur.com/GuLBEqp

So basically

1 - My property
2-6 - Parking bays for all other properties (Mine is one bay in 3)
7 - Outside my property there is a tiny pavement before its brick roads. I parked right outside my property (1) which there is no bay.

...and the operators POPLA response to your POPLA appeal with their "evidence"?

What POPLA replied with
When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The operator has provided evidence of the vehicle parked on the site on the day in question. I note the appellant’s grounds of appeal and I have reviewed the evidence of the vehicle parked on the site and the signage provided by the operator. The British Parking Association Code of Practice sets the standards by which its members must abide by. Section 19.3 of the code states that signs must be placed throughout the car park so that drivers have the chance to review the terms and conditions. The code confirms that these signs must be conspicuous and legible and written in intelligible language so that they are easy to see read and understand. The operator has provided multiple images of the signs within the car park and after reviewing these, I am satisfied that there are plenty of signs located within the car park and that these signs meet the requirements of section 19.3 of the Code of Practice. The signage on the site is clear in that vehicles parked outside of marked bays are in breach of the terms and conditions. The appellant has advised that the operator has not complied with The Road Traffic Act and the DVLA specifies that motorists are not allowed to drive under these conditions. I note the appellant’s comments however as the vehicle was parked on private land, the Road Traffic Act or any other regulations do not apply. POPLA does consider whether issues of discrimination have had an effect on the parking contract. We know that the Equality Act specifically protects disabled people from unfavourable treatment, and this does apply during the provision of services such as parking. In order to assess what effect the Equality Act had in the present case, we would need to be satisfied that there had been unfavourable treatment, and that a disability was one of the reasons driving the unfavourable treatment. I do not consider that the operator has applied any unfavourable treatment. I do not consider that the operator has demonstrated any breach of the Equality Act 2010, nor do I understand why the appellant believed this was the case. For clarity, any motorist parking in breach of the conditions of the parking contract would have been issued with a PCN. I acknowledge that the appellant is diabetic and I understand the seriousness of a hypoglycemic episode. I feel it is important in this case to highlight POPLA’s role. As an assessor my role is to consider if a parking charge has been issued correctly in line with the terms and conditions of the car park, evidence provided by both parties, relevant law, and the British Parking Association (BPA)’s Code of Practice, if applicable. Whilst I do appreciate that terms and conditions on occasion may not be followed due to circumstances outside of a motorist’s control, it is not within my power to allow an appeal on mitigating circumstances alone. The appellant has offered further evidence however the opportunity for either party to provide further evidence has now passed. It is not the role of the assessor to collect evidence or contact witnesses. They will look at the evidence that is provided to them from both parties and make a decision based on this alone. After considering the evidence from both parties the vehicle was parked outside of the markings of a bay or space and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. Based on the evidence provided, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly therefore, I must refuse the appeal


What P4PARKING Replied with (First Appeal before POPLA)
Issue date: 29/04/2024

5161394016 Popla Code Thank you for your correspondence received on 07/05/2024, which has been passed for
our attention and which we have read with interest. We have reviewed the case and considered the comments
that you have made.
Further to and in response to your appeal, P4Parking has been contracted by the landowners or agents thereof to
ensure that vehicles are only allowed to be parked on the land with authority. This authority is dependent upon the
rules as laid down by the landowners or bodies acting on behalf of such estate, land or development. P4Parking
has the authority to charge any vehicle that is parked contrary to these regulations.
It is the responsibility of the person parking to demonstrate the correct display of the relevant permit and or
adherence to the rules governing the parking of the vehicle(s) within the grounds. The area where your vehicle
was charged has a policy to which all attending vehicles must park within the pre-informed parking criteria. The
contravention you have been breached with specifically is for:
Parked Outside The Markings Of A Bay Or Space
Although I sympathies with your concerns, at the time of your vehicle contravention and subsequent issuance with
a Parking Charge Notice the vehicle was in breach of the above and therefore, correctly charged under the power
given to us by the landowner. When parking on private land, a motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide
by the conditions of parking in return for permission to park. It is the motorist’s responsibility to ensure that he or
she abides by any clearly displayed conditions of parking. It is also the duty of the driver to read signage placed
on the development.
With regards to your appeal of the parking charge issued and having inspected all data available, which includes
your letter and contents of appeal, photographs taken at the time of the charge issued by the warden and all
additional 3rd party information available to us, we must make the following points very clearly.
It is the duty of the driver to read the signage placed on the development. The signs on the development clearly
state "All vehicles parked within these private grounds and not displaying an authorized parking permit or parked
outside of this development's parking regulations will be charged via the issuance of a parking charge notice.
Enforcement may take place at any time."
Having read your statement, it is the motorist responsibility to read the warning notices on the development and
abide to the parking regulations and adhere to the rules governing the parking of the vehicle(s) within the grounds.
The terms and conditions from this site state that a vehicle must not be “Parked causing an obstruction or
parked outside of a marked bay”. Pictorial evidence provided by the warden shows that you parked your
vehicle in contravention to the terms and conditions displayed.
Under no circumstance are vehicle allowed to park there without management authorisation. You did not
seek authorisation and left your vehicle unattended in a controlled zone on private land.
The patrol officer has carried out his duties correctly as instructed by the landowner. Motorists parking on private
land must comply with the advertised terms and conditions, therefore the patrol officer had reasonable cause to
issue a parking charge notice on your vehicle.
Therefore the parking charge notice was issued correctly according to the instructions set out by the landowners,
please see attached pictorial evidence below.
After careful consideration, we must advise you that your appeal for this PCN has been REJECTED.
We are therefore unable to cancel the Parking Charge Notice as it was issued correctly. We have now extended
the discounted payment period by 14 days to allow you time to pay the discounted settlement amount. Please
now make payment of £60 to reach us by 01/06/2024 or £100 to reach us by 15/06/2024. We must advise you
that once the discounted settlement rate passes it will not be offered again. You have now reached the end of our
internal appeals procedure, you have the legal right to submit a second appeal to POPLA. P4Parking cannot deal
with any subsequent appeal relating to this parking charge notice.
Furthermore, it is our duty to inform you that if you should choose to submit to POPLA (Parking on Private Land
Appeals), you will lose all the opportunities to pay the discount rate. If you want to appeal, you must do so within
28 days of the date this notice of rejection has been sent.
If your appeal is refused then the full parking charge will be due as the time for any early payment discount
offered by the operator will have passed. Do not pay the charge if you are appealing. If your appeal is allowed you
have nothing to pay. If your appeal is refused, in order to avoid any further action by the operator, you should then
pay the full parking charge within 28 days.
The quickest and easiest way to submit your appeal to POPLA is online at www.popla.co.uk 5161394016 POPLA
verification code
By law, we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsmanservices.org/) provides
an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal, however, we have not
chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal, then you
must do so to POPLA, as explained above.
Please note, POPLA only applies in England, Wales and Scotland and it does not extend to tickets issued in
Northern Ireland.
Payments can be made choosing one of the alternatives:
Online https://p4parking.ec6pay.com
Send a cheque or postal order to Po Box 71107 London SE18 9LB payable to P4Parking UK LTD
1. Please ensure that you write the Parking Charge reference number on the reverse of the Cheque or Postal
Order
2. Please note that Post Dated Cheques will not be accepted
3. If you require a receipt, you will need to specify this along with your payment AND include a stamped self
addressed envelope.
You are advised to send postal payments by recorded delivery!
Call our automated payment line 03332407298
Choosing not to pay or not to submit an appeal to POPLA within the relevant time frame will give us the freedom
to legally solve this outstanding Debt. All costs associated with this process will be added to the amount
outstanding.
We are sorry this is not the answer for which you would have hoped.
Kind regards,
Appeals Department

I am assuming your property is the dark red outline adjacent to parking space marked 33.

You said you were parked in front of your house. It is difficult to tell from the picture you supplied whether you are potentially on your land. The portion within the dotted lines could be anything, garden, pavement, the front of your house.

If it so happens it was your land it's not a silver bullet but they may be outside whatever authority they have in their contract with the management co.

If it's a Bell way development is the manager Trinity Estates? (I merely ask because this is the case where I live and Trinity do have a more detailed site plan with better boundary markings and so on and it details common roadways etc).

No i was parked outside which the land is not owned by me. There's a area that is where the doorway to enter the house is, but it was more on the pavement of the private land.

I rang Bellway they told me they cannot provide any information about land ownership other than

- the property is mine
- the parking bays are mine

So you need a copy of your full deeds to see what the easements are, but I suspect it will relate to the parking.

Does the plan for the property (the bit outlined in red usually) include the parking spaces? If not that would add to my suspicion above.

How long ago was the freehold first established, more than 5 years and it's all but certain there will be no mention of permits or any other such BS, even if it's recent it would be hard for an easement to cover the various different PPC MOs.

Once we establish the full legal position you can then write to them explaining full (with evidence) as to why nothing is owed, it's unlikely they will progress to a letter of claim by October, but even if they do, have your reply prepared in advance and you can send it if required as soon as you return (or get someone to monitor your post and they can send it for you!).

- How long ago was the freehold first established

We bought the house in Q3 of 2017. So its close to 7 years now. The title register also states that.

I've messages Bellway (The property developer) to ask for the parking easements and once they reply ill post it on here.

Also is there a template if i remember correctly someone states there's a template i can use to prepare myself for my reply.
Thank you

You are too late to do any more appeals. Do not contact the PPC or any debt collectors who will be sending you scary letters with an added fake £60 or £70 fee. You can safely ignore them.

You have not answered the question about your lease and what does it say and not say about parking. A letter from a management company cannot alter or vary what is in your lease.

If P4 decide to take this matter all the way to a court claim for the alleged debt, you will need to know all the information that is being asked as it will form part of any defence. They may or may not go all the way and even if they do issue a claim, there is a high probability they would discontinue anyway. However we are trying to prepare you for all eventualities.

The only outcomes for this, for now, are:

1. PMUK tell their agent to cancel the PCN. Simply accepting their fob-off is not acceptable. You should be reminding them that they are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agents and who is the monkey and who is the organ-grinder in their contractual relationship with P4.

2. P4 decide after they and their debt collectors send you scary letters and you ignore them that  you are probably not low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and they'll put it down to a loss and go after riper, lower-hanging fruit and give up. We do not need to see debt collector letters.

3. P4 may decide that they'll ratchet up the pressure and send you a Letter of Claim (LoC) in the hope that it will further intimidate you. If you do get an LoC, show us.

4. P4 may decide to actually issue a claim in the hope that you will now capitulate or ignore it and they can obtain a CCJ by default. This must be responded to and cannot be ignored. Show us.

5. P4 may decide that as you are obviously not low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree and have submitted a robust defence (that we supply as a template) that this has gone too far for them as they are on shaky ground and don't really want a spanking from a judge and simply discontinue.

6. This goes all the way to a hearing and your argue your case in your Witness Statement (WS) and a judge will decide whether you owe P4 a debt or not.

7. If the judge decides your defence is valid, then you win. If the judge decides that your defence is not valid or P4 have proven that the driver did breach a contract, then P4 win. If they win, you pay the PCN amount plus £35 court fee and £50 fixed legal fee and that is the end of the matter. No CCJ or any damage to your credit record.

Sorry for the late reply i was away at the weekend with family.

I have a slight concern as im away for a whole month in October.

- What if i get a LOC during that time im out of the country and im unable to reply to it?

- How long do i usually have to respond to a CCJ? Im worried in case i miss out on the deadline by being out of the country.

Thanks