Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hello everyone,

I've been slapped with a PCN (as the keeper) for parking without a permit on some private land (pdf attached)

Bit of context:

1. The driver went to a church hall as they often do for a local residents association meeting at about 8pm at night.
2. While in the meeting the issue of parking / traffic in the local area was discussed and it was mentioned that the church had applied parking conditions on their site due to parents at nearby schools taking all their spaces during pickup / drop-off times.
3. The driver left the meeting and upon leaving, now being aware, saw the signs (photo attached).
4. PCN was received and Plan A commenced. Local residents association were helpful, explained that the driver was not the only one caught out by the new rules and wrote to the Church. I also wrote to the church, asking if they would be able to ask CE to cancel the charge.
6. Church was not very helpful, responding directly to me that the only course of action available is to appeal directly to Creative Parking (aside: seems like a different company to Civil Enforcement?)

I now think I should make some sort of appeal to CE as directed on the notice. Something I noticed, if the appeal is unsuccessful, I lose the chance to pay the reduced rate. Is that normal?


https://imgur.com/wqLkhDk
https://imgur.com/LWCGksP
https://imgur.com/lImFq5j

We need to see the PCN (all of it) please, just personal details redacted.

Creative and Civil are the same 'people' but different legal companies, so if the signs are in one name and the PCN or contract (with the Church) in another, they can't enforce it (but will continue blindly anyway).

Pretty shitty behaviour by people claiming to be religious!

Thought I'd done it in original post but didn't enter correctly, done now, thanks for the heads up!

And yes, don't get me started!

Thanks for this advice

Realistically, what grounds could I have for a part 20?
 
I have a feeling that the Church will just not be interested - do I have any course of action available with an appeal to CE?

Could I use the "Given that it's not paid for parking, the driver did not rob you of any income - parking is 'free' anyway"
Or the "I don't have to tell you who the driver is"

Failing these, would you suggest that I just pay it, or do something else?

For now you need to get a generic appeal in so that you can get a POPLA code. You don't have much time left for the appeal.

A simple appeal along these lines will get your rejection and POPLA code:

The chances of them accepting the appeal are close to nil. As b789 noted, the main purpose is to get you a code with which you can then appeal to POPLA. With that in mind, there's little harm in starting to consider your draft now.

You should, if possible, get some photos of the car park. They should be area pictures showing the layout and the signs. Whilst you won’t use close up photos of signs in your POPLA appeal except to perhaps show any inadequacies in them, it is useful to see where you were parked and exactly what signs were prominent or not.

You will need to point out in your POPLA appeal that CEL must prove that they have a valid contract between them and the landowner. A signed statement confirming that a valid contract exists is not sufficient evidence.

When you have provided some suitable photos to show the layout and general views of the car park and signs, I will be able to provide you with some suitable paragraphs for use in your POPLA appeal.

You have until Monday 29th July to submit your POPLA appeal. The rejection letter says 28 days but we know that POPLA appeal codes are valid for 33 days.

OK, there are signs but they do not appear to adequately bring to the attention of the driver what the charge is for breaching any terms.

Do you have a close up of the terms sign so that it can be compared to the Beavis sign to show the failures? The only close up you’ve shown us is the entrance sign that refers to the other signs with the terms.

Whilst it is agreed that it appears that the driver parked almost in front of a sign and it must have been still light at the time, the argument can still centre on the fact that the signs are a block of text in a tiny font and the charge is not adequately brought to the attention of the driver.

We need to see a close up photo of the sign to determine for sure if there is any weight to that argument.