Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi all,

Interesting bit is the charge notice claims that "the alleged parking event was detected and recorded by parking attendant at the site" but issued using CCTV and notice is a postal one.

Not denying the allegations but are they not in wrong to make such claims? What if driver parked there and went to look for empty space? Their evidence is of 3 still photos and signage.

Any advice how best to proceed? or just pay the fine as it's a standard procedure to issue notices using CCTV?

Thanks.

No sign this was issued using CCTV, looks like a manned attendant photo from the angles to me, what makes you think it was CCTV? (not that it makes any difference, either something is owed as a result of the parking, or it is not).

Well if the driver parked, they parked and by conduct likely accepted they contract they were breaching, and why they would do the not at all credible action of then walking around looking for a space (which would likely be gone after they returned to the car and drove to the previously empty space) a Judge would probably have a good laugh at that, just before instigating perjury proceedings perhaps.

Stop clutching at childish straws and lets stick to the facts shall we?
1/ Not a fine, an invoice, a bill, issued for damages arising from an alleged breach of contract.
2/ Plan A is always ask the landowner to cancel, in this case QEH, given the infraction they may not be willing to help, but you can but try, start with the PALS.
3/ We need to see all the PCN, not just the front, also photos of the signage and whether it was 'there to be seen'.

The answers to the questions you have posed have little to no bearing on whether or not the charge is owed.

My question still is why was this a postal notice?

Who knows. Some companies choose to issue charges via windscreen tickets, others through the post.

Is there any code of practice/guidance on CCTV/ANPR use?

The relevant Code of Practice would set out any rules around this, but why? From the looks of the photos, neither CCTV nor ANPR were used here.

As The Rookie says, absent a defence speaking to PALS at the hospital would be a good first step. Do you have any photos of the signage at the site?

PALS will still likely be your best bet.

Any compelling reason why they were unable to park in a bay before going into reception to make an enquiry?

The driver (helping someone) actually left the car to make enquiry in reception area and returned back to park within bay markings. Probably took the driver around 5-10 mins. If the notice was handed at the time, the driver could have gone to reception and get a written confirmation or some sort of witness statement. Also the exact time the car was left unattended.

The driver's obligation on private land where they're invited to park subject to meeting conditions is to look for the signs in the parking place once inside and stationary. You could argue that a totally naive driver didn't know that it is common practice in 99.999 of car parks to park in a bay before going to read signs and that all they did was park and look for these signs, but it's not true because you've said so and unless 'reception' is within the car park then the driver left the car park. 

As regards the 14-day discount, according to the NTK this is a available to you until 11 Oct.

any update on this case??

Hi, sorry for late reply as was trying to find the answers on this as they were away on holidays. The fine of £40 was paid after receiving the rejection letter.

regards,