3. PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: PCN Parked in a disabled bay  (Read 5390 times)

0 Members and 63 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #30 on: »
After I submitted, they have now attached their response which they had missed off in error initially.

Here is their text - with their additional photos on the document attached- the photo's they've used to prove signage are from nearly 5 years ago.

Gemini have had a contract in place at Queens Hospital since 27/01/2016.
All vehicles parked at this site must be parked within a valid and marked bay.
Bays are marked with white or yellow lines
Parking is not permitted outside of a marked bay, in the roadways, on cross hatched areas or on yellow lines.
A valid blue badge must be clearly displayed within the windscreen of the vehicle when parked in a blue badge bay
Terms of parking are sign posted upon entry to, throughout and along all exit routes of this car park.
Parking charge notice issued to vehicle.
Upon observation this vehicle was seen to be parked unattended in a blue badge bay on the 25/09/2023 without a valid blue badge on display.
The appellant has appealed claiming that they are the keeper and that their vehicle had a person with a disability.

We can confirm that this appeal was rejected as:

a)
As per the signage on site, a valid blue badge must be clearly displayed within the windscreen of the vehicle when parked in a disabled person’s blue badge bay. No evidence of a Blue Badge was provided.

b)
The appellant appealed via the ticket on vehicle and confirmed that they were the keeper. They were afforded the opportunity to provide driver details. The keeper chose not to do this, and their appeal was subsequently rejected.

c)
As can be seen below, there is clear and present signage on site pertaining to Blue Badge Bays. Signage has been present since at least 2019 and remains present to this date.

d)
Terms and conditions are offered; and by remaining in the car park, these are accepted. It is the driver’s responsibility prior to leaving their vehicle in the car park, to ensure that the vehicle is parked in accordance with the terms and conditions of that site.

e)
There are nearly 8.5 million people with disabilities in this country and driving provides the means for disabled people to access goods and services; and being able to park in accessible, wide parking bays are vital parts of this accessibility. We have consulted with and taken advice from organisations for people with disabilities who aim to improve awareness among the general public of the impact misuse has on disabled people. We strongly feel that being disabled brings enough obstacles and difficulties without the misuse of disabled bays and aim to ensure that designated disabled persons parking bays are used only by those entitled to do so.

The appellant has now submitted an appeal to the IPC in which they state there are no clear signs indicating that this bay is reserved for the use of Blue Badge holders. As can be seen in the images provided, there is clear and present signage, there are also adequate floor markings. The appellant states that signage was added after the contravention. As can be seen below, this is not correct.

See attachment for their evidences. They've given some random bay photos from early 2019, and have not addressed the fact that their signposts state they are members of BPA. Nor have they provided evidence of a notice to keeper...


I'm thinking to either send to arbitration as it is...or should I keep appealing for them to respond? (which seems like I might go in circles)

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
Logged
Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #31 on: »
Does the website give you the opportunity to respond to the operator's late data dump?
Logged
Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #32 on: »
Yes it does...and then it gives them another opportunity too.
Logged
Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #33 on: »
Go for it then. And remember - it doesn’t matter if you lose because a loss isn’t binding on you. But if you win, it’s game over
Logged
Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #34 on: »
Ok so they have dismissed my appeal, and it looks like a bog standard copy and paste template. I dont believe they've actually read through the details. Here it is:

"It is important that the Appellant understands that the adjudicator is not in a position to give his legal advice. The adjudicator's role is to look at whether the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each particular case. The adjudicator's decision is not legally binding on the Appellant (it is intended to be a guide) and they are free to obtain independent legal advice if they so wish. However, the adjudicator is legally qualified (a barrister or solicitor) and decides the appeal according to their understanding of the law and legal principles.

The guidance to this appeal makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances. The terms of this appeal are that I am only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events.

The markings in and around the bay that the Appellant's vehicle parked in make it clear that disabled parking only is allowed in the bay. I consider it reasonable to assume that by parking in a clearly marked disabled bay a driver must also clearly display a Blue Badge in order to prove that they are entitled to park in such a bay. In such situations it is the driver's responsibility to ensure that a Blue Badge is correctly displayed. While noting the Appellant's comments, the photographic evidence shows that no Blue Badge was available for inspection at the time the vehicle was observed. As no Blue Badge was available for inspection in the vehicle I feel it is appropriate to have issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN). The images provided of the Appellant's vehicle are time and date stamped, clear and of high quality. I am satisfied that the correct vehicle is identified and that the correct Appellant is pursued.

The Operator provides photographic images of the Appellant's vehicle from various angles, which clearly show that the vehicle is parked in a disabled bay while not displaying a valid Blue Badge. I am satisfied that the Appellant was clearly parked within a disabled bay. In such bays, the terms and conditions of parking mean that if the driver cannot clearly display a Blue Badge they can either park elsewhere, or remain parked and agree to pay the charge. Whether or not they are a Blue Badge holder, the contractual terms make it clear that any driver parked in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a valid Blue Badge agrees to pay a charge. I am satisfied on the evidence provided that the Operator has the authority to issue and enforce PCNs at this site. I am further satisfied as to the location of the contravention, that the correct vehicle has been identified parked at the time suggested in the images provided and that in the circumstances the correct Appellant is pursued.

Whilst having some sympathy with the Appellant, I am satisfied that the Operator has proved their prima facie case. Once liability has been established, only the Operator has the discretion to vary or cancel the parking charge based on mitigating circumstances.

Accordingly this appeal is dismissed.

My thoughts:
1. None of the images of my vehicle show a disabled parking only signage - what is the adjudicator referring to?
2. The images which show disabled signages are not current but date stamped from 2019 - 5 years ago. Other images given by operator are from another outdoor forecourt car park which I will not have driven past to the indoor car park - this was of no relevance to my vehicle.
3. The adjudicator says he/she has some sympathy with appeallant - why? I did not ask for sympathy nor any extenuating circumstances or for forgiveness.
4. Adjudicator does not address issue with none service of NTK or that operator was seeking keeper liability via POFA.

I am certain this was a copy and paste job form the adjudicator. What can I expect next?
Logged
Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #35 on: »
What can I expect next?

From the creditor: a series of letters demanding payment. I think your unreasonably high expectations of a fair shake from IAS have been dashed. C'est la vie. It changes nothing, the assessor's decision is 'a guide'. I like playing a straight bat in these situations so I would write to the creditor, note the assessor's decision, respectfully disagree, reiterate that you will not be paying the driver's alleged parking charge, advise that you will not respond to any extra-procedural correspondence from them and ask them to pursue you as keeper to a competent court as soon as the law allows.

With respect, there's no point keep rehearsing your complaints and understanding of events here because we're not decision makers: the die is cast; the ball is in the creditor's court and all you can do is wait..your problem is that the theoretical time bar to them pursuing you doesn't come for nearly 6 years. NB. don't complain to us, complain to the Ministry of Justice!

From PALS: I don't know whether you're still pursuing this route.
Logged
Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #36 on: »
HCA is spot on, as usual.  If Gemini takes the case to court at any time in the next 6 years, follow the advice over on
**NEWBIES!! PRIVATE PARKING TICKET? OLD OR NEW? **READ THESE FAQS FIRST!** Thankyou! — MoneySavingExpert Forum
MoneySavingExpert Forum · forums.moneysavingexpert.com
and you should win.

Gemini is now part of APCOA, who rarely go to court.

I would also add that, in view of the 6 year time limit for Gemini to commence court proceedings, it is vital that whenever you move home in the next 6 years (in addition to updating your driving licence and V5C vehicle registration as required by law) you must notify Gemini's data protection officer of your new address and require the erasure of your old address.  The easiest way to get a CCJ is to allow a PPC to sue you at your old address.  Royal Mail post forwarding is not 100% foolproof and nobody keeps it going for 6 years.

Send this to DPO@Geminiparkingsolution.com and DPO@apcoa.com after each move in the next 6 years:

Dear Sirs,

PCN [         ] VEHICLE [                 ]

I dispute this charge and intend to defend any claim initiated in relation to it.

Please note that I no longer reside at the address shown on the PCN and correspondence sent to me there will not reach me.  I require you to erase my former address from your records.  My new address is [                        ] and I attach proof thereof.

Yours faithfully,

Be sure to attach proof of your new address, ideally a V5C vehicle registration document (for any vehicle) but a utility bill or some official communication will do. 
Logged
Re: PCN Parked in a disabled bay
« Reply #37 on: »
Jumping in late on this but the OP appears to not understand that they are safe from having to pay these scammers a penny. The OP was advised that an appeal (Plan C) to the IAS was a waste of time and effort yet went ahead anyway.

Ignore the response from the IAS. They are a kangaroo court. You are home and dry on this. They would be stupid to try and proceed to Plan D which is a court claim. They are relying on there OPs gullibility to either dob themselves in by revealing the identity of the driver which is the only way they would have any grounds to continue on to a court claim.

@Driver86, you need to understand that they have no idea who was the driver. Only the driver can be held liable for the PCN. The only way they would know the identity of the driver is if you blab it.

In civil law, the "driver" and the "keeper" are two separate entities. They cannot hold the "keeper" liable because they have failed to adhere to PoFA in more ways than one. They failed to issue a NtK within the prescribed period. They are not allowed to "presume" anything, especially whether you were the driver just because you are the keeper.

You are home and dry. Ignore all future correspondence from these muppets and any debt collectors. The only thing you need to respond to is a Letter of Claim/Letter Before Claim (LoC/LBC) or an actual claim itself. As already pointed out, whilst they are definitely intellectually malnourished, they would be extremely stupid if they were to actually fork out money and issue a county court claim because this is so easily defendable if you follow the advice.

Carry on with your life and stop worrying. Come back if they are stupid enough to issue a county court claim within the 6 years from the date of the parking event. Unlikely but just be aware of it.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Pages: 1 2 [3]
« previous next »
  3. PCN Parked in a disabled bay