Skip to content

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - BigBazz45

Pages: 1 [2]
16
By way of an update, I'm pleased to say that ParkingEye have given in and cancelled the PCN without me having to go to POPLA.

17
What the hell the end of Pedestrian Zone signs refer to, I've no idea. I cannot find else anything which corresponds, but it's not germane to the OP's case.
Verulam Avenue and Tudor Court are included in a School Street zone for St. Saviour's Church of England Primary School.

Details can be found here.

18
As long as the driver is not identified this will go nowhere. As you rightly mentioned, PoFA does not apply in Scotland. The NtK is not PoFA compliant and even if it was, PE has not complied with the requirements of PoFA §13.

The standard appeal from the keeper telling PE to go find the driver will see it off.
Assumed that would probably be the case. Will enlighten them as to the error of their ways and see what they come back with.

19
For clarity, is the notice you've got addressed to you as the hirer directly, or the rental company?
The Notice is addressed to me as the Hirer and came in a ParkingEye envelope, so I can only conclude that they've obtained my details from the rental company.

20
The Driver was driving a rented van for an event being held at the Crowne Plaza in Glasgow. They parked in the hotel's overflow car park and entered the registration number on the tablet at Reception. Payment was made on the day of departure.


Despite this, ParkingEye have issued a Parking Charge Notice claiming a failure to pay for the last day, when the Driver moved the van to the Hotel's Service Yard to load it up for the return journey, then parked back in the overflow car park. This appears to have initially been sent to the hire firm, who have provided the Hirer's details. The only paperwork in the envelope was the Notice to Hirer.

Unusually for PE, this isn't a double dip, as the arrival and departure times reflect that last day, rather than the original arrival and final departure time.

PCN Images: https://imgur.com/a/hKL6h1m
GSV showing signage at the entrance: https://maps.app.goo.gl/2D9oFEy9X6o5dsk77
And signage within the car park: https://maps.app.goo.gl/MGcr5DNuLLzAL9MCA

The Driver lives in London, so it's not practical for them to return to get their own photographs of the signage.

I'm assuming there are at least two prongs of attack, namely the parking event occurred in Scotland, so PoFA doesn't apply; and the fact that it was a rental vehicle.

21
Yes, but the next event day is supposed to be displayed on the entry to th e zone where event day restrictions are imposed. So you need to find out where the zone boundaries are, and get a photo of the sign. They have a legal duty to display the event days on the zone entry signs. They cannot say "it's all on our website". If that is what they are saying you should take them to London Tribunals where you will win.
We don't know which direction the OP approached Raynham Avenue from, but GSV shows zone entry signs on both sides of Fore Street at its junction with the A406, complete with "Next event day" plate: https://maps.app.goo.gl/skRRtk2zSmL1EFmV8

Approaching from the Tottenham direction, there are signs on both sides of the road at the boundary with LB of Haringey:

And approaching from the Westbound North Circular Road and using a series of back streets: [URL=https://maps.app.goo.gl/WZTxkLgVFxe5JUKMA]https://maps.app.goo.gl/WZTxkLgVFxe5JUKMA


I'm only aware of one occasion where they forgot to update a couple of the signs, resulting in me getting a PCN. Fortunately they cancelled at the informal reps stage upon being presented with the evidence.

22
As an aside, earlier Streetview imagery, such as this from 2009 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/vJScXXC8ZKG524LP9) shows where the OP parked to have previously been a trolley park, but it's lost its shelter at some point.

Obviously we don't know how full the car park was when the OP arrived, but the markings on the actual bays in that area appear to be clearly visible, even in the dark.

23
The rejection of informal reps is dated 4th September (so deemed to have been delivered on the 6th), which I reckon gave the OP until 4th October to pay before an NTO was issued.

Slightly surprised that Enterprise dealt with it so quickly though, unless they're the Registered Keeper rather than a finance company.

24
The Flame Pit / Re: Most vexatious rep ever?
« on: July 09, 2023, 12:26:13 am »
They can't be the most vexatious rep ever, they clearly marked their letter 'Without Vexation'  ;)

I like that somewhere in the midst of all of their freeman on the land style nonsense they've clearly paid a visit to PePiPoo and found some of Ostell's private parking template appeals...
Just a shame that's totally irrelevant as it looks to be Council on-street enforcement of school entrance markings!

GSV:https://goo.gl/maps/MXtCaW7xFC9AX6xe6

Pages: 1 [2]