-
"The driver" has been at it again, parking in private car parks and ignoring the time limits on parking. This one is at Boots in Clapham Junction where the limit for free parking is 1 hour (clearly shown in GSV) and "the driver" parked for 1hr 55 mins.
A PCN duly came through the post today. Date of "offence" 31 May. Issue date (and supposedly the date of posting) is given as 6 June (last Thursday), received today 11 June (Tuesday) hence delivered five days after posting.
I have read the rubric on the PCN carefully and it seems to me that the wording in the penultimate paragraph of the box on the first page complies with paras 9(2) (e) and (f) of Part IV of POFA 2012 which requiresQuote(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;
(f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—
(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;
If anybody can spot a shortcoming I would be glad to hear it but unlike the PCN in Purley Way that was also down to "the driver" ignoring signage
https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/ppc-pcn-purley-way-nexus/msg12773/#msg12773
where Nosey Parker pointed out an inadequacy in the notice, I cannot see similar here.
I attach the PCN. Any way out of this? Anything in the delay in sending out the PCN? The front page of the PCN is in the smallest font I have ever seen!
Here's the GSV link to the location
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Boots/@51.4647877,-0.1666174,-14a,46.5y/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1sXarvWpf3WGcAAAQW5Fenzg!2e0!3e3!6shttps:%2F%2Flh3.googleusercontent.com%2Fgps-proxy%2FALd4DhFUNbaybVkwEI5pApgsX9PFhW97pRGj2cNuo2TQ_s4tD8-a2ggrPpBkKCnDSSaxDksaa-YDbUEGiMS1Cc5YJBLZ17ml_YUxwFepYB-LasqVWdVGqMCRiFQoJmAOh_52Ke0t6_kFquGuQ0bd3WjEwzsVoPe7yW3JFtMOU0Rl_FjI5ap47uhJSXjrpI7Y6VryhVH4VBI%3Dw152-h86-k-no!7i2844!8i1600!4m16!1m8!3m7!1s0x48760598584ced31:0x43e45d799f0d748c!2sFalcon+Ln,+London+SW11+2LG!3b1!8m2!3d51.4648708!4d-0.1662677!16s%2Fg%2F1tl1hc81!3m6!1s0x487605985840d4dd:0x2cac5bac4437c4c0!8m2!3d51.4648897!4d-0.166258!10e5!16s%2Fg%2F1tnpdxkg?entry=ttu -
-
I've removed that first attachment - you'd left your vehicle VRM and PCN reference number showing, the only details needed to access the VCS appeals portal. Someone with ill-intent could cause you problems with those details. You should re-share it with those details redacted.
Do you have any photos showing the terms and conditions on the signage within the car park?
A usual first step would be to speak to Boots, but unless they were buying out the store, it seems unlikely that the driver was a customer..? -
-
I'm afraid the driver was not a customer and even if they were, to spend nearly 2 hours in one Boots store would be a bit unlikely. I can go along tomorrow and photograph the signage but from GSV it's clear the limit is 1 hr. Redacted PCN attached
-
-
Photos of car park. Seems free parking is now 1.5 hours. "The driver" managed to stay for 1' 55"
-
-
-
-
Any advice on this one or should I pay at the discount which runs out next Thursday?
-
-
It all depends on how strongly you feel whether you should fight it or not.
Whilst almost impossible to read your picture of the NtK as it is barely in focus, it would appear to be PoFA compliant which means the keeper becomes liable if the driver is not identified.
The only arguments I can see are problems with signage. The signs are cluttered and the charge is not adequately brought to the attention of the driver. In the last photo, there are no signs visible.
Why did the driver not realise that the limit was 90 minutes? At first, they thought it was only 60 minutes. Does that suggest that the signage was inadequate?
There is a possibility that VCS don’t have a valid contract to pursue the motorist in their own name or it may be expired. However, you would not be able find this out unless you are prepared to challenge the PCN.
There are possibly CRA 2015 failures with the contract that the driver entered into.
If you decide to challenge it, it would in all probability go all the way to a court claim. VCS are a nasty, vexatious firm of ex-clamper thugs who are litigious. If it did go to court, there would be technical and administrative flaws in their claim which would be covered at the time. These would be, but not limited to, abuse of process by trying to claim for more than the law allows and failing to clearly state the cause of action in the claim.
It comes down to whether you think a £40bribediscount is worth it when you know who you are dealing with. Failure would risk around £200. Success would be the satisfaction that you beat a bunch of scammers and are not be marked as a “mug” by them. -
-
I'm struggling to see any particularly strong avenues of defence. B789 has listed some avenues you could explore, but these in all likelihood would involve a trip to court to test out. None of them are 'slam dunk' points in my view.
I'd put the signage in the "not great, not terrible" bracket. The key term around maximum stay is fairly clear, and the £100 charge is written in a large enough font that I think you could struggle to convince a judge it was not adequately conveyed.
I'm not saying you definitely wouldn't win, just that there's a fair amount of risk involved. -
-
So OP, do you see yourself in the vanguard of the anti-PPC army which wants to hurl insults at these companies at every opportunity and try and give them a bloody nose by tripping them up once a claim is made - at considerable time and effort on your part- or simply and objectively(I assume objectively) want to deal with this parking charge in the most optimum manner?
The only guarantee which can be given regarding the discount is that it is available until the date in the NTK, which is...? -
-
Thanks everyone. Your thoughts are mot inconsistent with my own thinking. To clear up a few points:
1. Sorry about the reproduction of the NtK. I scanned and then tried to upload as invited below the dialogue box when writing the post and it was rejected on size grounds. Has the site as a whole reached a capacity limit? I have not had this issue before on FTLA and thought it a bit of an advance on Pepipoo.
2. Imgur and tinypic seemingly will not accept a pdf which is the format in which my scanner scans. Therefore I had to take a photo on my mobile to upload via Imgur and as I said the font size was tiny in the first place so a bit difficult to read. I am not the greatest techie so I may have missed something here.
3. The third photo I posted shows the locale but not the positioning of the signage. Suffice to say it is pretty clear. One is on a pole just in front of my motorbike (side on in the photo) and there are two on the walls of the shop either side of the door which is the second "brickwork" photo. Can't really complain.
4. "The driver" just didn't really look at the signage nor take note of the time when she parked the car as she "parks there a lot". She checked it when she returned.
Bit late then. The 1 hour limit is a red herring - it looks from GSV as though it had been an hour and is now 90 mins. Either way she exceeded it.
5. The NtK does follow the wording of Part IV para 9 pretty faithfully so I don't think there is a POFA angle. Nor is there any doubt about location of the relevant land, both of which were very much not the case in St Michael's Court and why I fought that one all the way until poleaxed by an incomprehensible decision by the arbitrator who let the PPC get away with "High Street [or equivalent]" as a perfectly adequate description of location and a non-POFA notice excused as a "typo". Still smarting over that one!
6. Date of issue of NtK 6 June, received 11 June, end of discount period 20 June.
7. I don't really want to fight a heroic battle without much faith I have a winner in my hand nor sit tight and ignore all the threatening letters in the hope this bunch of nasty ex-clamper thugs will just give up, so paying at the discount amount seems the logical thing to do.
Life goes on..... -
-
Has the site as a whole reached a capacity limit?
The site doesn't receive any funding, so makes use of a free/low-cost forum software provider. This inevitably comes with limited upload space, as image hosting requires a lot of space.
-