Author Topic: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre  (Read 149 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

M456

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« on: October 10, 2024, 05:50:14 pm »
Hell All,

I received a parking ticket for not paying for parking. I visited the site yesterday and noticed a sign indicating that parking terms could be found on the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park website. However, I have thoroughly searched the site and could not find any relevant terms or conditions. I also called the provided number and learned the company of the telephone number no longer manages this site. There is also another sign from ParkingEye put has different times of operation and a higher rate for non memebers

Do you think this will be accepted in my appeal or should I just draft the standard response to all private parking tickets?


The sign: https://imgur.com/a/anXwgIW

The parking ticket: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DmOLx9G7Hiey4ZL7zzrWGcGEMK8Hjo5T/view?usp=sharing

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2538
  • Karma: +107/-4
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2024, 08:17:47 pm »
Any appeal must be only as the keeper. Do not identify who was driving. There is no legal obligation on the keeper to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking company.

The PE Notice to Keeper (NtK) is not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA and so the keeper cannot be liable if the drivers identity is not known by PE.

So, your post should start: "I The keeper received a parking ticket for not paying for parking."

Are you saying that there are no other signs at the location? Any contract is formed by the terms on the signs at the location. They cannot be formed by anything on a website. The contract is formed by conduct, whether the driver bothered to read the signs in situ, or not.

If you can, go back and get some photos of the signs and the general layout.

There is no mention of ParkingEye or any BPA roundel on the sign you have shown us.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2055
  • Karma: +61/-0
    • View Profile
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2024, 08:21:00 pm »
I remember doing some research into this site a while ago for a case on PePiPoo as parts of it may have been subject to byelaws. Thanks to PePiPoo's demise I can't go back and find it but I'll see if I can dig up any of the documents.

b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2538
  • Karma: +107/-4
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2024, 08:24:37 pm »
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2538
  • Karma: +107/-4
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2024, 08:32:33 pm »


It ain't relevant land.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2055
  • Karma: +61/-0
    • View Profile
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2024, 09:08:15 pm »
Bingo - cheers b789. There was in the thread I'm thinking back to eventually a map discovered, I believe, that defined the scope of the land covered by the byelaws (the one on the first page is not the same one I believe), but from my admittedly hazy memory of the case it was agreed by members that the car park in question was not relevant land.


b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2538
  • Karma: +107/-4
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2024, 01:03:47 am »
The GSV images are over 6 years old. However, the main point is that PE have issued an NtK under PoFA. As the location is land under statutory control, it is not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA.

PE are attempting to hold the keeper liable unlawfully. Here is an appeal you should make as the keeper to PE:

Quote
Appeal against PCN [PCN Reference Number]

I am writing to formally appeal the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) referenced above, which was issued to me, the registered keeper of vehicle [Vehicle Registration Number] for an alleged parking contravention at the London Aquatic Centre, Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park.

I am challenging this PCN on the following grounds:

1. Land Governed by Byelaws – Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) Inapplicability
The location where the alleged parking incident occurred is governed by byelaws made under section 164 of the Public Health Act 1875 by the London Borough of Newham, which apply to the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park. As such, the land is under statutory control.

The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 explicitly excludes land under statutory control from its provisions. Consequently, the Notice to Keeper (NtK) issued under PoFA 9(2)(b) is invalid, and it is unlawful for ParkingEye to attempt to hold the registered keeper liable in this instance. I decline to provide the identity of the driver, and as keeper, I have no liability for this parking charge.

2. Breach of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice
The BPA Code of Practice (CoP) Section 21.2 clearly states that where parking is subject to statutory control (such as areas governed by byelaws), PoFA cannot be used to establish keeper liability. By issuing an NtK citing PoFA on land where it does not apply, ParkingEye is in breach of the BPA CoP. Furthermore, this constitutes a misrepresentation of ParkingEye's authority to enforce parking charges under PoFA, contravening the BPA’s requirement for transparency and fairness.

3. Unlawful Use of My Personal Data – Breach of the KADOE Contract
ParkingEye's request for my data from the DVLA was made under the KADOE contract, which stipulates that data may only be accessed for "Reasonable Cause." Under Section B2.1 of the KADOE contract, Reasonable Cause includes seeking recovery of parking charges in accordance with PoFA or the ATA Code of Practice.

Given that PoFA does not apply to land under statutory control, the use of my data to pursue a PoFA-based charge was not in accordance with the KADOE contract. This constitutes unlawful processing of my data, as there was no legal basis for its use in this context.

[4. Insufficient Details of the Alleged Breach
The NtK fails to specify the exact nature of the contravention, only stating that either "not purchasing the appropriate parking time" or "remaining longer than permitted" occurred. This lack of specificity does not meet the requirements of PoFA Schedule 4, even if PoFA were applicable, and fails to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim.

Requested Actions

In light of the above points, I request that ParkingEye:

Cancel the Parking Charge Notice immediately.
Cease any further contact with me regarding this PCN, aside from confirmation of cancellation.

Please be aware that a separate, formal complaint will be raised with ParkingEye concerning this matter, and I will escalate the complaint to the BPA if not resolved. The unlawful use of my data under the KADOE contract, along with the breaches of the BPA CoP, will form the basis of a separate complaint to the DVLA.

Should this appeal be rejected, please provide a detailed explanation addressing each point raised and a POPLA code for further independent adjudication.

Separately, you must also email the DPO of PE with a data rectification notice instructing them to erase your old address and for them to update their records with your correct address for service. The highlighted words are for a reason and must be used. You do not want them having two possible addresses as that is the most common way people receive CCJs by default.

You also need to update your V5C with your current address. Updating your drivers licence with the DVLA does not automatically update your V5C.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2024, 01:12:47 am by b789 »
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Like Like x 2 View List

M456

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2024, 08:19:29 pm »
ParkingEye rejected the appeal, but the ticket was then cancelled without explanation.

Most likely due to the complaint I made to the Aquatics Centre and LLDC.

Thank you all
Winner Winner x 1 View List

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2055
  • Karma: +61/-0
    • View Profile
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #9 on: November 04, 2024, 08:38:21 pm »
If PE rejected the appeal but subsequently cancelled that does suggest someone somewhere intervened, so your complaint may well have worked.

All's well that ends well - thanks for the update!

nicolabee

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: ParkingEye - London Aquatics Cenre
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2024, 03:51:36 pm »
Hello - this happened to me too!!

Its crazy - there is no where to pay - please can you share what you wrote in your appeal and what you said to LAC?

Thanks so much