Author Topic: Brittannia Parking PCNtoK Parked/Stopped in a no parking area APNR Bromley Police Station access Road  (Read 1518 times)

0 Members and 994 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hi, I am after some advice after getting my first Parking Charge Notice to Keeper which arrived today (image hopefully below), from Britannia Parking. The date of contravention is 26th January 2025 I have not responded. The Charge is Parked/Stopped in a no parking area. The evidence provided are 2 images from an APNR camera of the driver driving into the access road and leaving the access road just under 2 hours apart.
This access road leads to a Waitrose carpark further down the road where there is a 1.5hour free stay limit ( no purchase required). Entry and exit to this carpark is monitored by a second set of APNR cameras.

The facts are the driver drove down the the road at the time indicated in the first picture dropped a passenger off at Waitrose and left. Returned the second time approx. 1 hour later, parked in Waitrose, collected said passenger and then left under an hour later at the time indicated on the PCNK. At no time did the driver stop or park in a no parking area ( the No Parking are is naturally not the Waitrose carpark, but the access road to the carpark)

Naturally I want to appeal on the basis that the driver did not stop or park in the No parking area. The evidence present do not show the car stopped or parked, but two images of the car entering and leaving just under 2hours apart. The front numberplate was temporarily on the front windscreen after falling of.  I am the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Thank you
[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: February 11, 2025, 06:31:55 pm by Wheelocks »

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook


You have obscured some important information... We need to see all the dates and times.

You have obscured some important information... We need to see all the dates and times.

Oops sorry, I have change it

For completeness, can you show us the back page?

The good news for you is that, based on those dates, they have issued the notice too late to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (there's a link in my signature underneath my posts), meaning they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the driver, who they don't know, to the registered keeper.

You can therefore appeal with the below:

Dear Sirs,

I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ________) for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge. I note from your correspondence that you are not seeking to hold me liable as the registered keeper, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("The Act"). You have chosen not to issue a Notice to Keeper in accordance with The Act, and it is now too late for you to do so.

There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with this matter, and look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code.

Yours,

If appealing online, be careful there are no drop down/tick boxes that cause you to identify who was driving, and keep a close eye on your spam folder for their response. If they do not respond within 28 days, chase them.

For completeness, can you show us the back page?

The good news for you is that, based on those dates, they have issued the notice too late to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (there's a link in my signature underneath my posts), meaning they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the driver, who they don't know, to the registered keeper.

You can therefore appeal with the below:

Dear Sirs,

I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ________) for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge. I note from your correspondence that you are not seeking to hold me liable as the registered keeper, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("The Act"). You have chosen not to issue a Notice to Keeper in accordance with The Act, and it is now too late for you to do so.

There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with this matter, and look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code.

Yours,

If appealing online, be careful there are no drop down/tick boxes that cause you to identify who was driving, and keep a close eye on your spam folder for their response. If they do not respond within 28 days, chase them.


Thank you. What is the time limit for them to issue the notice please?

Picture of the back of the notice below. [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: February 11, 2025, 07:16:10 pm by Wheelocks »

If you take a look at Schedule 4 of PoFA, it specifies that a notice to keeper must be 'given' within 14 days of the parking incident. 'Given' means delivered, and the Act further specifies that a notice sent by post is presumed delivered 2 working days after sending.

In your case, the notice was issued on Thursday 6th Feb, and therefore deemed delivered on Monday 10th. Whoops, that's later than 14 days!

Have you checked this out?



However, as the Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not PoFA compliant, that is always going to be your main point of appeal. If the issues is due to what is known a "double dip" where the middle two ANPR photos have not been scrutinised, they will have also breached your GDPR by unlawfully requesting your DVLA data.

They are required to check all ANPR data for what is, in this case, "orphan images" which would have confirmed that the vehicle was not on site for the duration that are claiming. This is a breach of the BPAIPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) section 7.3(d) which states:

Quote
Photographic evidence must not be used by a parking operator as the basis for issuing a parking charge unless:
d) images generated by ANPR or CCTV have been subject to a manual quality control check, including the accuracy of the timestamp and the risk of keying errors.

Note 1 to that section goes on to state:

Quote
NOTE 1: The manual quality control check for remote ANPR and CCTV systems is particularly important for detecting issues such as “double dipping”, where image camera systems might have failed to accurately record each instance when a vehicle enters and leaves controlled land...

By having failed to comply with the PPSCoP Britannia has therefore breached the KADOE contract with the DVLA and should be reported to them for this breach. Also, you should sue them for breach of your GDPR under the Data Protection Act 2018 and should claim damages and compensation.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

Have you checked this out?



However, as the Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not PoFA compliant, that is always going to be your main point of appeal. If the issues is due to what is known a "double dip" where the middle two ANPR photos have not been scrutinised, they will have also breached your GDPR by unlawfully requesting your DVLA data.

They are required to check all ANPR data for what is, in this case, "orphan images" which would have confirmed that the vehicle was not on site for the duration that are claiming. This is a breach of the BPAIPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice (PPSCoP) section 7.3(d) which states:

Quote
Photographic evidence must not be used by a parking operator as the basis for issuing a parking charge unless:
d) images generated by ANPR or CCTV have been subject to a manual quality control check, including the accuracy of the timestamp and the risk of keying errors.

Note 1 to that section goes on to state:

Quote
NOTE 1: The manual quality control check for remote ANPR and CCTV systems is particularly important for detecting issues such as “double dipping”, where image camera systems might have failed to accurately record each instance when a vehicle enters and leaves controlled land...

By having failed to comply with the PPSCoP Britannia has therefore breached the KADOE contract with the DVLA and should be reported to them for this breach. Also, you should sue them for breach of your GDPR under the Data Protection Act 2018 and should claim damages and compensation.


Thank you. The website shows only the two images in the PCNK and nothing else. Reading online, it appear the Britannia also operate the parking for the Waitrose and use those two cameras in tandem. If they don't register a car as entering Waitrose they assume you have Parked/Stopped in the No Parking area and send a PCNK. I can only imagine therefore the Waitrose APNR did not pick up the front plate due to its location on the windscreen on arrival, but would definitely have got the rear plate when the car left Waitrose.

If I were you, first things first, I would get an appeal sent off, using the wording I suggested further up the thread. This gets the appeal wheels in motion and deals with the live parking charge, whilst not preventing you from taking any other action you may wish to as outlined by b789.

If I were you, first things first, I would get an appeal sent off, using the wording I suggested further up the thread. This gets the appeal wheels in motion and deals with the live parking charge, whilst not preventing you from taking any other action you may wish to as outlined by b789.


Many thanks to all for the help so far. Sent off the appeal and with the wording as advised above, stating just that I would not be naming the driver as the Notice to Keeper was deemed to be delivered outside the 14days.

I have received these to letters back. The first one acknowledging the appeal and second which does say if my appeal was rejected and with no POPLA Code as requested ( so I assume still fishing for information). Though I am not sure if it is related to my appeal or a standard letter sent out if they haven't received a payment.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: March 01, 2025, 08:45:21 pm by Wheelocks »

And the second one.... [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

That response is risible. So much so that I'd be minded to file a formal complaint about their conduct, to complaints@britannia-parking.co.uk.

Here's a suggestion. I've knocked it together fairly quickly so others may suggest improvements. You could also attach a copy of that letter to your complaint for clarity.

Quote
Subject: Formal Complaint, PCN #[REFERENCE]

Dear Sirs,

I am writing to make a formal complaint about your correspondence in respect of PCN #[REFERENCE], which amounts to a breach of the Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (PPSSCoP) and, by virtue of this, your KADOE contract with the DVLA.

Following receipt of your PCN, I appealed as the registered keeper, pointing out that due to your failure to deliver a Notice to Keeper within the relevant period of 14 days as required by Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA), you are unable to recover the charge from me as the keeper. You responded with a letter dated 26/02/2024, which is attached, claiming to be notifying me under PoFA that you have the right to recover the charge from me as the keeper. This is a clear breach of the PPSSCoP and the KADOE contract for the following reasons:

1. Breach of the PPSSCoP
Section 8.1.1 of the PPSSCoP states:

8.1.1 The parking operator must not serve a notice or include material on its website which in its design and/or language:
d) state the keeper is liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 where they cannot be held liable.

In my appeal, I explained that Britannia had failed to serve a notice compliant with the requirements of PoFA, having given the notice outside of the relevant period of 14 days. You then responded on 26/02/2024 with the attached letter, claiming the ability to recover the charges from me under PoFA. This is a deliberate misrepresentation, and a breach of 8.1.1 of the PPSSCoP.

As per Annex H of the PPSSCoP, this constitutes at least a Level 1 sanction for non-conformance.

2. Breach of the KADOE Contract
Clause C1.1 of your KADOE Contract with DVLA states:

The Customer shall ensure that signage, terms and conditions of service for parking customers and correspondence with data subjects comply with the Law and with the requirements of the ATA’s Code of Practice or Conduct.

By knowingly and falsely claiming compliance with PoFA, you have failed to comply with the terms of your KADOE contract, bringing into question your suitability to have access to sensitive registered keeper data.

As a result of these serious failings you should:
  • Confirm that the parking charge has been cancelled and that no further action will be taken
  • Explain why your correspondence falsely claims the ability to recover charges under PoFA when you are, or ought to be, fully aware this is not true
  • Issue a formal apology

I expect a thorough response to my complaint within 14 days. Following your response, I reserve the right to escalate this matter to the British Parking Association, and the DVLA.

Yours etc...

Thank you, I will send this off this week.

Thanks again.
I sent off the formal complaint on the 8th. Haven't heard anything back from that yet.
However I received the the expected appeal rejection with the POPLA Code.
Is the next step to appeal via POPLA?

Pics below.... [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: March 22, 2025, 06:16:54 pm by Wheelocks »

Back page [ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]
« Last Edit: March 22, 2025, 06:19:46 pm by Wheelocks »