#4 Bristol Airport IAS Case - VCS
on 17 Aug, 2024 01:36 in Private parking tickets
I was issued a parking fine by VCS for stopping on an access road just outside the short-stay parking exit at Bristol Airport. I had paid for parking already, and only stopped to fetch a bottle of milk from the boot for my infant son who had just woken up as we left the car-park. I handed the bottle of milk to my wife who was sitting in the back passenger seat next to my sons car seat.I appealed this, and this was their response:https://imgur.com/a/RqvSTbTWhich is false, so I took it to IAS.My initial appeal:QuoteAfter going to the airport to pick up my father in law, I parked my car and paid the £8 parking fee. Upon leaving the car park, my infant son woke up and began crying as he had not had his milk due to napping on the long drive to the airport.This incident occurred moments after me leaving the car-park. I stopped for a moment to get the milk out of the boot of the car.I chose a road to stop on that had no 'no stopping' signs visible. It was far away from the terminal, and posed no safety issues as it was a very quiet road.Given I have paid for the parking, and only stopped due to a crying infant, in an area with no safety concerns and far away from the terminal - I believe this is fair grounds to levy a dismissal of the fine I have been issued.Their denial states: "A review of our CCTV evidence has confirmed that on the date in question, your vehicle stopped to collect a passenger on the access road where restrictions apply". This is wholly a lie. If they had truly reviewed the CCTV footage they would see I got out the car to get a bottle for my son.I have attached my bank statement showing the £8 paid parking fee, which shows the payment as processed on the 15 July (The actual payment was the 13th, but as this was a weekend it shows as processed on the 15th).The no-stopping areas surrounding the terminal are to stop people from avoiding the drop-off/pickup fees. I paid the fees.They have outright lied on their appeal denial, I paid for parking, and I only stopped to manage my infant son.Their response:Quote1. Bristol Airport and all its approach roads are private land which motorists are allowed to enter provided that they agree to the Terms and Conditions of use. There are 81 signs on site, at the entrance and throughout the roadways, which state ‘No Stopping' or ‘No Drop Off or Pick up'. The entrance signage clearly states motorists will become liable for a charge of £100 if they contravene these Terms and Conditions.2. Site photographs supplied confirm the signs can clearly be observed and the entrances and throughout the site. The adjudicator will note that the VCS signage onsite, including its wording and positioning has been audited by the IPC, has passed audit, complies with the IPC Code of Practice and is deemed fit for purpose.3. Airports are by their very nature, sensitive, high risk security areas, which are always on a high level security alert status. Given the sensitive security issues at airport sites it is not unusual to prohibit stopping of any kind on all the approach roads.4. A no stopping zone has been introduced on the airport approach roads and, due to growing congestion caused by vehicles stopping and blocking lanes. The subsequent congestion has created safety risks for other motorists and potential costly delays for emergency vehicles responding to incidents at the Airport. This CN was issued in respect of a vehicle stopping on a private road running alongside a busy international airport. Any vehicles obstructing the roads, no matter for how long can cause serious problems for airport traffic, including cargo and emergency vehicles. Vehicle Control Services (VCS) Ltd patrol, manage and enforce on the access roads and bus stops, where stopping is not permitted and seek to do so by making motorists aware of the requirements with signs.5. The CCTV stills supplied show that the vehicle stopped on an access road which is designated by the landowner as a restricted area, where stopping is prohibited at all times for unauthorised purposes.6. A review of the footage we possess shows the appellant's vehicle stationary when first observed, remaining stationary for approx. 20 seconds before driving away. During this time, the driver is seen outside of the vehicle, the passenger door (which was open at the start of the footage) is closed and the driver then re-enters the vehicle. We are unable to supply the CCTV footage due to GDPR as other vehicles are visible, however appellant does not dispute that they stopped and exited their vehicle in this location.7. The circumstances cited by the appellant do not warrant grounds for the cancellation of this charge. It is a motorist's sole responsibility to ensure they are prepared for their onward journey before beginning their journey, particularly if they are exiting a car park onto a restricted area where stopping for any reason is prohibited. The appellant denies that they stopped to pick up a passenger and while the footage does not show that a passenger entered the vehicle, the passenger door was open. Regardless, the charge was not issued for picking up a passenger but for stopping in the restricted area. Whether the appellant stopped to tend to their child or to pick a passenger up, they had no cause to believe they were authorised to do so.8. The appellant states “The intention of the no-stop here i believe is to stop people from avoiding the pickup/drop-off charge”. We can confirm the signage on site clearly states “No Stopping” and makes clear that stopping for any reason, not solely for pick up/drop off purposes is prohibited.9. The contract between the appellant and VCS was formed when the motorist entered the site. When entering this private land, a motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide by the conditions advertised in return for permission to enter. It is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they abide by any clearly displayed terms and conditions. It is clear that the terms and conditions stated ‘No Stopping' otherwise the motorist would face liability for a Charge Notice.10. The position of the appellant's vehicle can be observed in the supplied annotated signage map and annotated vehicle location which highlight the proximity of the appellant's vehicle to VCS signage. We would reiterate that this site and its signage have passed audit by the International Parking Community (IPC).11. A helpline telephone number (open 24 hours per day) is clearly displayed on all VCS signage for any motorist experiencing difficulty. This was not utilised by the appellant. Had the appellant contacted us as soon as was practical and brought the matter to our attention, it is possible provision could have been made. It is not possible to make provision for motorists after the fact.12. The pertinent point in this case is that the appellant, having been given sufficient notice of the terms and conditions in place, freely chose to stop their vehicle on this roadway where stopping for this purpose is prohibited all times. Ultimately, when entering this private land it was the sole responsibility of the motorist to fully comply with the clearly advertised contractual terms and conditions, by their failure to do so the appellant became liable for the CN, which was lawfully issued.13. By stopping in a zone where stopping was prohibited the appellant became liable for the Charge Notice issued as per the Terms and Conditions displayed.And in my final response:QuoteThe items uploaded in response to my appeal do not substantiate their false claim of me "stopping to collect a passenger". Further, I have submitted proof of paid parking in the form of a bank statement.My initial appeal remains valid, and so far no evidence at all has been provided to the contrary.I feel stupid for sending that final response now, having only learned about this website AFTER I had submitted it. As I am sure I could have crafted something a lot better than what I did.I am waiting for arbitration now, but I fear I will 'lose'. Do I have any further recourse?