Recently had to visit Gatwick North several times over a couple of days as the wife was trying to recover a lost suitcase.
Anyway, each visit the car we were travelling in was parked in the North Terminal Short Stay carpark. Three sessions in total.
The first visit a ticket was obtained recording an entry at about 01:15, when we went to leave about an hour later, on presenting the ticket to the machine, it simply said "Drive to exit", which we did. On arriving at the exit barrier, the screen on the machine said reading registration, popped up the registration on the screen and then opened the barrier and we left.
The subsequent two visits were around 16:50 the same day (Sunday 27th) and today (28th) at around 20:35. These two visits cost £10 each.
I put the first visit not be charged down to it being in the small hours of the morning. Later investigation however it would seem that the short stay is a 24hr carpark and there are no free time periods listed. The minimum is 0 to 30 mins at £6, 31-60 mins at £10.
On the last visit I asked a member of Easyjet staff if she knew, and she said "Oh they're very clever, I'd advise going online and paying the £5 drop off fee, otherwise they'll send you a ticket for £100."
I got home and thought "No that can't be right." the drop off route is completely separate, and we definitely didn't go anywhere near it.
I think I know what happened now though...
I think that going into the carpark at 01:15, and leaving an hour later, it would be 02:10 exit, BUT... the clocks went back at 02:00, so I think the machine basically thought we were within the 10 minute period to change our minds and leave the car park without committing to parking and paying.
Does this sound plausible, and should we just wait and see what happens, or should we be taking any other action?
Gatwick being subject to statutory controls, in the form of byelaws, means that the car parks and drop off zones are not 'relevant land' for the purpose of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As a result, the parking company have no mechanism through which to hold the registered keeper liable, and can only recover the charge from the driver, whose identity they do not know.
Do nothing for now - if you receive any parking charge notices, come back here for further advice and we'll be able to suggest suitable appeals.
Thanks, I figured as much having read a few more posts here about Gatwick.
Will just sit back and wait.
Hmmm! Managed to do something similar again.
Was dropping the wife off at Gatwick Airport. Rather than just drop her off and leave, paying £7 for the privilege, I figured I would go to short stay, go in with her have a coffee and whatnot.
However on arriving at a space in the car park, she said there wasn't enough time before she had to go through to the gate, and not bother so I left.
As I hadn't got out of the car, I was hoping there was a way to pay at the barrier, so drove to them and they have contactless readers on them, so figured if a charge was due the barrier would stay down, but... A message appeared about reading my number plate, and then it raised the barrier and let me leave.
Gatwick information is that the short stay car park minimum fee is £7 for 30 minutes, £10 for an hour.
I am guessing this time it was because I was in the car park for about 8 minutes, and that this is within the period of time that has to be allowed for someone to change their mind and leave the car park, would that sound right?
Anyway, I guess I'll wait to see if any litter arrives and deal with it then, and as stated it should lead to nowt.
Gatwick is still subject to byelaws as per my previous reply, so regardless of the specifics of the case, the charge can still be appealed on the basis of my previous response.
Come back if you receive anything through the post.
In every case involving a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) from a private, unregulated parking firm, you should never identify the driver. This is especially important for alleged contraventions on land under statutory control—such as airports, railway stations, and ports—because that land is not ‘relevant land’ under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). As a result, the operator cannot use PoFA to transfer liability from an unknown driver to the registered keeper. By not naming the driver, you prevent the operator from holding the keeper liable under PoFA.
Agree x 1
View List