3. Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Crystal Palace park car park PCN  (Read 2175 times)

0 Members and 146 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #15 on: »
Nobody on here or anywhere else can offer you any guarantees or promises of success, but we can almost guarantee that any appeal to the IAS will fail, just because they're a biased bunch. Don't take a rejection from them as an indication of the quality of your case. You would seem to have some stronger grounds that could be used at court, should the matter get that far at all.
Logged
Like Like x 1 Agree Agree x 1 View List
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #16 on: »
Quote from: gge12 on October 21, 2024, 03:13:44 pm
Thanks all. Will have a go and let you know how I get on. I suppose the risk of the IAS appeal is paying £100 instead of £60 if unsucessful...
I will also upload a picture of the tiny signage to my appeal.
Logged
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #17 on: »
Quote from: b789 on October 21, 2024, 03:01:16 pm
Of course you appeal it. however, any appeal is going to be rejected, no matter how logical you explain it to them. Additionally, as CPM are IPC members, there is little hope that an appeal to the IAS will be successful.

However, as we are now relying on the new Single Code of Practice (SCoP), it may be worth trying, just to see if there is any change. I doubt it, but I love to be proved wrong.

The initial appeal should just be as follows:

Quote
Formal Appeal Against Parking Charge Notice (PCN No. [Insert PCN Number])

This is an appeal by the Registered Keeper for the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) issued to vehicle [Vehicle Registration Number]. The PCN has been issued unfairly because of the following reasons:

1. Inadequate Signage and Breach of the Single Code of Practice (SCoP)

The signage at the site is inadequate and fails to comply with the Single Code of Practice (October 2024) section 3.4. The only sign is attached to a gate, positioned below windscreen height, parallel to the direction of travel, and features text in a tiny font, making it impossible for drivers to see or read the terms upon entering the car park.

The relevant section of the SCoP (October 2024) states:

"3.4. Material changes – notices

Where there is any material change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a driver entering controlled land that is or has been open for public parking, the parking operator must place additional (temporary) notices at the site entrance for a period of not less than 4 months from the date of the change making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who might be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur parking charges.

NOTE: Examples of material changes can include introduction of parking enforcement where none has previously applied, introduction of time-limited free parking, or reductions in the time limit within which free parking is available. Given the need to avoid confusion and clutter at entrances the test is whether the fact that a change has been made is clearly signalled to drivers on entering the land and the nature of the change is clearly displayed thereafter – it may also be necessary to install repeater notices depending on the scale of the premises."

The signage at the site fails to meet these requirements, as no clear entrance sign was present to alert the driver of the changes, and there were no repeater signs displaying the new terms within the premises. As a result, no contract was formed between the driver and UK-CPM.

2. Non-Compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012

The Notice to Keeper fails to meet the requirements of Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) of Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012, as it does not invite the registered keeper to pay the parking charge. Without full compliance with PoFA, the registered keeper cannot be held liable for this charge.

3. Lack of Proof of Driver Identity

As the registered keeper, I am under no obligation to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company. It is the operator's responsibility to provide sufficient evidence that the keeper and the driver are the same individual. No such evidence has been provided, and therefore, as no inference or assumptions can be made, liability cannot be transferred to the keeper.

In light of these significant failings, I request that this Parking Charge Notice be cancelled immediately.

sorry also worth mentioning that I am the driver, not the registered keeper.
Logged
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #18 on: »
The NtK is addressed to the RK. Unless the RK has transferred liability to you, it has to be in the RKs name as the RK.

As there is some non-compliance with PoFA, the RK has another layer of defence should it ever get that far. If the RK is not prepared to handle the process, even if you do it in their name, the transfer of liability has to be done before you can appeal in your name.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #19 on: »
Unsurprisingly I received the following rejection to my appeal:

Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge Notice.

At UK CPM we consider all appeals on a case-by-case basis. We take each appeal very seriously and thoroughly investigate any evidence that has been provided. We appreciate your circumstances and understand this is not a situation anyone would like to find themselves in; however, these parking conditions have been put in place to ensure fair usage for all motorists and support the needs of our client. After careful consideration, it is unfortunate that I am writing to you today to advise that on this occasion, your appeal has been unsuccessful.

The decision to uphold your parking charge notice has been made on the following basis.

Whilst we note the comments and reason for appeal, we can confirm that the vehicle remained on site for 44 minutes with no payment or permit made to authorise your stay. We must advise that this car park is run by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras which take a time and date stamped image of the vehicle on entry and exit, measuring the length of time the vehicle remained on site, this information is then cross-referenced with the data from the payment services & permit systems. Due to no payment or permit being found, we can confirm that this PCN has been issued correctly.

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and therefore you now have two options; either pay or appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) - you cannot do both.

To make payment of the total amount due as shown above, please use one of the following payment options;

Online: www.paymyticket.co.uk
Telephone: 0345 463 4040 (24hr)
Post: Payments & Collections, PO Box 3114, Lancing, BN15 5BR
Alternatively, if you do not agree with your internal appeal outcome and you wish to dispute the matter further, as you have complied with our internal appeals procedure you may use, and we will engage with, the IAS Standard Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal to them within 21 days of this rejection.

The Independent Appeals Service (www.theIAS.org) provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. If you decide to appeal to the IAS, you will need to visit their website and use your PCN reference and corresponding vehicle registration. All PCN's will be uploaded to the IAS website by the end of this working day.

If you appeal this charge further then you will lose the ability to pay at the reduced rate (if applicable). In the event that your IAS appeal is unsuccessful, the full amount for the PCN will then be payable. If you lodge an appeal with the IAS and then subsequently pay the charge prior to that appeal being determined, then the appeal will be withdrawn, and you will not be given a further opportunity to contest the charge.

If you do not wish to dispute the matter further and payment is not received within 28 days of the date of this correspondence then additional charges may be incurred, for which you may be liable. If the charge continues to remain outstanding, the matter may be later referred for litigation in the County Court which could result in a County Court Judgment being made against you; this may impact on your ability to obtain credit in the future.

 
Logged
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #20 on: »
Can anyone help me to draft an appeal to the IAS please? Also as someone mentioned they are likely to uphold the decision regardless what recourse is there left? How willing are they to pursue something like this to court?
Logged
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #21 on: »
Personally I wouldn't bother with an IAS appeal. If someone else wants to help you, by all means, you can give it a go but don't hold your hopes up for a successful outcome at this stage.

This will be won if/when they try to take it to the ultimate dispute resolution service, the small claims track of the county court. You are dealing with vermin whose sole aim is to try and extort money from you. At least if this goes as far as a claim, you can easily defend it with assistance from us here.

A defended claim, especially one such as this with a clear breach of their CoP, will end in one of three ways with 99% certainty. A discontinuation, a strike out or a win at a hearing if it ever got that far.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #22 on: »
Thanks a lot. Will sit tight and await the onslaught of threatening letters.

Out of interest, do they tend to go as far as court proceedings or do they sometimes just give up after a while? Would be good to get some links to other threads where similar cases have progressed either way.
Logged
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #23 on: »
Quote from: gge12 on November 11, 2024, 12:56:11 pm
Out of interest, do they tend to go as far as court proceedings or do they sometimes just give up after a while? Would be good to get some links to other threads where similar cases have progressed either way.
It is most likely going to end up as a claim. As already mentioned above, the vast majority of these claims never reach a hearing stage as they end up being discontinued or struck out. The few that do ever reach a hearing, are more often than not, won.

The modus operandi of these PPCs is to try and get money through the PCN recipient's ignorance of the litigation procedure. Anyone not here or over on MSE getting advice is most likely going to poop their pants once they see that litigation is threatened or initiated and they simply cave in out of fear and ignorance of the process and end up paying, the now inflated" sum.

They will push this all the way to the point where they must pay the trial fee before a hearing. If their victim hasn't caved in by that point, they simply discontinue and move on to the many thousands of other claims they have in progress. It is a sort of "loss leader" for them to push all the way to just before a hearing.

You are dealing with what are, in effect, ex-clampers who have turned to manipulating the court system to their advantage. It's not unlawful but it is certainly unscrupulous.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #24 on: »
Can they not sell the debt on to bailiffs though as another option which could be damaging to your credit score?
Logged
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #25 on: »
Quote from: gge12 on November 12, 2024, 09:06:46 am
Can they not sell the debt on to bailiffs though as another option which could be damaging to your credit score?

There is no "debt" until this is proven (or undefended) in court.  Hence the empty threats.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2024, 09:44:14 am by dave-o »
Logged
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #26 on: »
Quote from: gge12 on November 12, 2024, 09:06:46 am
Can they not sell the debt on to bailiffs though as another option which could be damaging to your credit score?
Someone been watching too much reality TV? Listening to unsubstantiated rumours on social media?

The "debt" cannot be "sold" to "bailiffs". There is no "debt" until a judge says there is.

Where to start with this? The debt collectors cannot "buy" the "alleged debt". What they do is offer a no-win, no-fee service to the PPC. They tag on a fake £70 to the original charge and use scary words to try and pluck the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree into pooping their pants out of ignorance of the process and the law to capitulate and pay up.

What most people don't understand is that the debt collector is not a party to the contract that the driver is alleged to have breached with the PPC. As they are not a party to that contract, they cannot do anything. However, the gullible see the words "bailiff" and "CCJ" and cave in and pay up when there is absolutely no reason to do so.

Debt collectors can be safely ignored. They cannot send round "bailiffs" and they cannot get a "CCJ". They cannot do anything. Never, ever, ever, ever, communicate with a useless debt collector. Just ignore them. They will eventually give up.

Another fallacy is the concept that because you have received a PCN (mistakenly thought of as a "fine" when all it is, is a speculative invoice from a private company) that your credit record will be affected. Utter rubbish.

The only way your credit record can be affected is if a debt claim was made against you in the county court, you lost the claim and then didn't pay the judgment amount within 28 days. That is a CCJ. Even if you lost in court, as long as the CCJ is paid in full within 28 days of judgment, there is no record of it on your credit history. It is completely expunged from the record. If it is paid after 28 days, then it remains on your credit record but marked as "satisfied" for 6 years. That is about 1 degree less painful than an "unsatisfied" CCJ.

So, even if you were sued in court for the alleged debt and a judge decided you do owe it, as long as it is paid in full within 28 days of that judgment, there its no record of it and  no damage to your credit score. No one here would advise anything that could get you a CCJ.

As for bailiffs... A court approved bailiff cannot simply turn up at your doorstep. A bailiff can only show up if a CCJ was made against you in court, it was for over £600 and a warrant/writ for it has been issued. For CCJs under £600, there would not be any bailiffs.

So, can we put this nonsense to bed about selling debts, bailiffs knocking at your door and damaged credit records?
« Last Edit: November 12, 2024, 12:02:20 pm by b789 »
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #27 on: »
Quote from: b789 on November 10, 2024, 10:07:53 am
Personally I wouldn't bother with an IAS appeal. If someone else wants to help you, by all means, you can give it a go but don't hold your hopes up for a successful outcome at this stage.

This will be won if/when they try to take it to the ultimate dispute resolution service, the small claims track of the county court. You are dealing with vermin whose sole aim is to try and extort money from you. At least if this goes as far as a claim, you can easily defend it with assistance from us here.

A defended claim, especially one such as this with a clear breach of their CoP, will end in one of three ways with 99% certainty. A discontinuation, a strike out or a win at a hearing if it ever got that far.

In the event it were to go to the ultimate dispute resolution service though, would not completing the IAS appeal count against you?
Logged
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #28 on: »
No.

You've taken steps to resolve the matter and set out your position, so you've behaved reasonably in my view.
Logged
Like Like x 1 View List
Re: Crystal Palace park car park PCN
« Reply #29 on: »
Recently received this delightful letter:
https://imgur.com/a/AGumA3h
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »
  3. Crystal Palace park car park PCN