Author Topic: Parking Charge Notice Received.  (Read 2189 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
  • Karma: +14/-0
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2024, 02:46:05 pm »
A couple of points after reviewing this thread… OP, you stated early on the following:

The driver and passenger went to pick up an order at the restaurant beside the Natwest bank.
From the cctv the wait was at least 15mins.

You then go on to state in your appeal:

The driver did not leave the car at any time nor turn off the engine of the car. The car was not parked and there was no intention to park at any time.

What exactly occurred? Did the driver park the car, switch off the engine and leave the car unattended for 15 minutes or was the car just stopped for a short duration in order to load or unload?

Would someone explain why the NTK is not compliant e.g. it was given in time, it contains the mandatory warning etc?

If it's compliant, then why is the OP claiming - without staring why - it is not?

I wrote early 9n in this thread that there could be a technical flaw with the NtK due to some wording without going into detail at this stage as it will not be for the PPC to determine. As far as I was concerned, there is only a requirement to raise the matter of the flawed NtK in order that it can be dealt with later by a legally trained mind, either at POPLA (questionable) or by a judge.

The technical point is that the wording in the warning to the keeper does not strictly comply with PoFA, which it must do.

PoFA paragraph 9(2) states that a NtK must-

9(2)(f) warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days…

The NtK does not warn the keeper. It advises the keeper. Yes, I appreciate that this could be argued as splitting hairs. However, whilst it is likely to be up to a judge to agree or disagree whether this discrepancy in significant wording alters any facts, it should be raised.

The point of how it is argued is in the definitions of “to warn” or “to advise”, specifically in relation to statutes and legal matters. The term "must" in legal language generally indicates a mandatory requirement rather than a suggestion or advisory. Therefore, the failure to meet this requirement could potentially invalidate the ability of the operator to hold the keeper liable.

However, the interpretation and application of legal statutes can be nuanced and subject to legal debate. When something is required by law, it means there are consequences for failing to do it. If you are legally obligated to warn someone about potential risks or dangers and you don't, there could be legal repercussions such as, in this case, transfer of liability from the driver to the keeper. On the other hand, when something is advised, it is more of a suggestion or recommendation without the same level of legal backing.

At the end of the day, it is a point of dispute and is raised as just one of a number of arguments. Having discussed this with a district judge, he told me that if it was raised, he would be obliged to consider that fact. As to whether it would be conclusive, was not determined and it would be up to the individual judge as to whether they agreed or not.

Hence my reason for suggesting that the validity of the NtK to hold the keeper liable under PoFA is raised. I agree that the PPC is not going to consider this and POPLA are just as likely to disappoint on this single issue. However, if this ever progresses to Plan D, it is a valid point to include in a defence.
Why have we never see the headline "Psychic wins the lottery"?

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #31 on: February 18, 2024, 08:07:50 pm »
A couple of points after reviewing this thread… OP, you stated early on the following:

The driver and passenger went to pick up an order at the restaurant beside the Natwest bank.
From the cctv the wait was at least 15mins.

You then go on to state in your appeal:

The driver did not leave the car at any time nor turn off the engine of the car. The car was not parked and there was no intention to park at any time.

What exactly occurred? Did the driver park the car, switch off the engine and leave the car unattended for 15 minutes or was the car just stopped for a short duration in order to load or unload?

Would someone explain why the NTK is not compliant e.g. it was given in time, it contains the mandatory warning etc?

If it's compliant, then why is the OP claiming - without staring why - it is not?

I wrote early 9n in this thread that there could be a technical flaw with the NtK due to some wording without going into detail at this stage as it will not be for the PPC to determine. As far as I was concerned, there is only a requirement to raise the matter of the flawed NtK in order that it can be dealt with later by a legally trained mind, either at POPLA (questionable) or by a judge.

The technical point is that the wording in the warning to the keeper does not strictly comply with PoFA, which it must do.

PoFA paragraph 9(2) states that a NtK must-

9(2)(f) warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days…

The NtK does not warn the keeper. It advises the keeper.

Thank you B789 for your contribution.

The driver and passenger drove to the location in order to pick up an order at the restaurant.
I provided this background because you asked that I fill in some detail.

Can you please fill in some detail as to why the car was at that location? You say that the driver never left the car. However, that is irrelevant. How long was the car stopped, if at all, at that location?....
Was the driver picking up or dropping off a passenger?

The driver and passenger went to the location in the car. The passenger got out of the car and walked to the restaurant to pick up the order while the driver waited in the car. The wait was about 15mins.


Below is my intended reply.
I'll appreciate final comments please.
Thank you.


I appeal as the registered keeper.
I dispute your 'parking charge' and deny any liability or contractual agreement.  Further to, I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn.
I am not obliged to identify the driver and decline to do so. You cannot transfer the driver’s purported liability to me. You have not served me with a Notice to Keeper (NtK) that strictly complies with Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) and it is now too late to do so.

According to the driver, no contract could have been agreed as there were no signs that were prominent or even visible at the location, which is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice (CoP), section 19.2.
From the photos, it can be seen that the signs are beyond the gate and a camera mounted before the signs. This arrangement is evidently not in good faith as it all seems set to ambush the driver only for them to realise when it is too late.
The position of the signs does not give the driver an option to read the signs, terms and conditions decide whether or not they wish to enter into such “agreement”. By the time the driver gets to the signs, they’re already in.
Furthermore, according to your Parking Charge Notice (PCN), any signs at the location would have been “forbidding” if they stated “No Parking”, thus proving that there was no contract by conduct on offer.

Your PCN states that it is being issued because of “Parking In No Parking Area”.
The driver did not leave the car at any time nor turn off the engine of the car. The car was not parked.

The charge for parking could not have been agreed as there was no sign at the entrance of the road to that effect. This is in breach of BPA Code of Practice (CoP), section 19.1. “…. the driver should be made aware of from the start. You must use signs to make it easy for them to find out what your terms and conditions are.”

No entrance signs. This is in breach of S.19.2 BPA CoP.  “Entrance signs play an important part in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore, as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of. Entrance signs must follow some minimum general principles and be in a standard format”.
No contract to park could have been created or agreed. Therefore, there is no debt owed by the driver and I am not liable as the registered keeper.

I now require you to cancel the parking charge or issue me with a POPLA code where a trained assessor will likely agree with me that the PCN has not been issued correctly.

andy_foster

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 445
  • Karma: +7/-3
  • Location: Reading
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #32 on: February 19, 2024, 01:25:15 am »
Unless you are stuck in traffic, if a car is stationary for 15 minutes it is parked, regardless of whether the driver remains in the vehicle, whether the engine is running or whether he is picking his nose.

If you want to peddle that tripe in your appeal, that's your choice, but don't peddle it here.
I am responsible for the accuracy of the information I post, not your ability to comprehend it.

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #33 on: March 06, 2024, 12:00:34 am »
My appeal was rejected.

Below is their response.  I'll draft my POPLA appeal and post for comments.

PAYMENT DUE DATE: 11th March 2024

TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: £60.00

 

Dear xxx           

 

Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on behalf of the driver. We have carefully considered your appeal, however on this occasion the appeal has been rejected for the following reason;

                                                                                                                         

Whilst we note the comments and reason for appeal, as per our photographic evidence, the vehicle was parked in contravention of the advertised terms and conditions. As the vehicle was parked in an area where no parking is allowed, 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; you can either pay or appeal to POPLA - you cannot do both:

You can pay the total amount due as shown above via the following payment options;

Call us on: 01302 513232
Pay online: www.pcnpayments.com
Send a postal order: Premier Park Ltd, PO Box 624, Exeter, EX1 9JG
Or, you can appeal to an Independent Appeals Service, POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) using the POPLA reference code provided above. Please note, should you decide to appeal to POPLA and your appeal is subsequently rejected or you withdraw your appeal, the option to pay a discounted amount will no longer be available and the full amount of the PCN will become due. Please note, if you pay the PCN prior to appealing to POPLA, your appeal will be withdrawn as you will have accepted liability in full.

If you decide to appeal to POPLA, you will need to visit their website, www.popla.co.uk where further details of how to appeal (either online or by downloading the relevant forms) can be found. If you are unable to access their website, please call us for further information on how to obtain the forms. Please ensure your POPLA Reference Number, as noted above, is quoted on all correspondence to POPLA. You have 28 days from the date of this email to submit an appeal to POPLA. If you appeal to POPLA we will suspend recovery activity on the PCN and the charge will not increase until the appeal has been determined.

 By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.

If you do not make payment or submit an appeal to POPLA within the relevant timeframe, the outstanding PCN may be passed to our appointed debt collection agency for further action. All costs associated with this process will be added to the amount outstanding.


Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #34 on: March 25, 2024, 11:51:02 pm »
How do I prove the address of a location please?
The driver went into this side entrance by Natwest 9 North St, Rugby CV21 2AH
The NTK refers to it as Rugby Central Shopping Centre 19 Market Hall CV21 2JR.

CV21 2JR is show here.
Please see pdf image  showing the side entrance on North St beside Natwest (green line) where the car went a few feet, turn, waited then left (red line). I've put both images on the pdf showing the post codes on Google. Ofcourse Google could be wrong and it might be inadmissible in court but for certain, that road is North Rd not Market Hall.

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #35 on: March 26, 2024, 12:48:23 am »
The the parking firm under an obligation to write the correct address on the NtK?
Using Land Registry's Map Search there isn't any such address under that title. The closest is
MANAGEMENT SUITE, 19 MARKET MALL, THE CLOCK TOWERS SHOPPING CENTRE, RUGBY CV21 2JR
The NTK says Rugby Central Shopping Centre 19 Market Hall CV21 2JR. 

How do I prove there's no such place as 19 Market Hall at the Shopping Centre and if there is it's not where the car is photographed?
I've put together screenshots from the Land registry's site showing the closest description to the address on the NtK amongst the addresses listed under the title.

H C Andersen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 891
  • Karma: +19/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #36 on: March 26, 2024, 02:39:32 pm »
I wouldn't bother, IMO you're clutching at [pointless] straws which is a distraction.

Using the post code in GSV delineates an area immediately next to the Nat West. You won't win at IAS on such fine margins.

@b789, where does this appear in Schedule 4 either verbatim or its meaning?

the wording in the warning to the keeper does not strictly comply with PoFA, which it must do.

PoFA states:

9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.

.....
)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—

(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;


'Warn', which can take on various forms. It does not have to state the words 'you are warned that....'.

The PCN says:
'You are advised that if ABC and DEF ..we will have the right to recover the unpaid charge from the keeper..'

This is a clear warning in anyone's language IMO.

Don't risk the discount on this point IMO.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #37 on: March 26, 2024, 10:11:18 pm »
I wouldn't bother, IMO you're clutching at [pointless] straws which is a distraction.

Using the post code in GSV delineates an area immediately next to the Nat West. You won't win at IAS on such fine margins.

@b789, where does this appear in Schedule 4 either verbatim or its meaning?

the wording in the warning to the keeper does not strictly comply with PoFA, which it must do.

PoFA states:

9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.

.....
)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—

(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and

(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;


'Warn', which can take on various forms. It does not have to state the words 'you are warned that....'.

The PCN says:
'You are advised that if ABC and DEF ..we will have the right to recover the unpaid charge from the keeper..'

This is a clear warning in anyone's language IMO.

Don't risk the discount on this point IMO.

Thanks. The discounted period ended a while back. I'm in the last couple of days left for POPLA appeal.

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #38 on: March 28, 2024, 05:28:57 am »
Dear all,

Please see link to my POPLA appeal.

Your comments will be most appreciated.

I understand some are of the view there's no point but as I already missed the discount I thought to give it a shot.

PoPLA code received 26th Feb so I assume I have till Friday but prefer to submit tonight please.

Thank you.


Link to NtK here.

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Karma: +27/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #39 on: March 28, 2024, 10:29:31 am »
If the discount is gone then I agree there's little to be lost by rolling the dice with POPLA.

Do you have a photo of the back of the notice?

A couple of points:
  • Location: You list the location as stated on the notice then immediately follow this with: "CV21 2JR is indeed Rugby Central Shopping Centre" - I'm not sure this sentence particularly helps your case... Also, I'd be minded to see if you are able to get any Screenshots from something such as a Land Registry map rather than Google Maps. I don't think the location point is particularly strong, as it doesn't seem at all ambiguous what location they're referring to, but as above, no real harm in trying.
  • PoFA: You list a whole host of ways they do not conform with it, double check them. 9(2)(h) for example, you claim they don't identify the creditor or say how payment can be made, but on the first page of the notice it says "We, the Creditor, now request this amount is paid using one of the payment methods overleaf"
  • Grace Periods: You seem to be quoting an old version of the Code of Practice, make sure you are using the most up-to-date one (version 9, Feb 2024, there's a link in my signature). The two periods cannot be added together to allow drivers to park anywhere as long as they don't stay more than 20mins. A consideration period is an opportunity to read the signs and decide to either leave, or park, it's not a period of free parking (it's also a minimum of 5mins, not 10). A grace period at the end is unlikely to apply as this was not a permitted parking event.

b789

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 713
  • Karma: +14/-0
    • View Profile
    • GullibleTree
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #40 on: March 28, 2024, 12:17:38 pm »
There are a couple of instances where “Smart Parking” are mentioned as it is obvious that some of the POPLA appeal has been cut and pasted from other POPLA appeals. Without trawling back through the whole appeal, they were somewhere in the ANPR bit.

Regarding which version of the BPA CoP should be referenced, this event occurred in January 2024, which means that the CoP v8 applied at the time.

I agree that the “relevant land” argument is flakey. There is enough information in the address details given in the NtK to identify the location. It would need to be so ambiguous when searching the address to identify the location, such that there is more than one distinct, geographical location that is not adjoining the relevant location. Then again, it is for the operator to rebut that point.

There is also some mention in the appeal about the ability to read any signs and lighting conditions. The event occurred in the middle of the day, so lighting conditions are not really relevant.

It will be interesting to see if PP rebut every point and how the assessor will decide. When the rebuttal does come in, make sure that every point you have made is covered. You only need to win on a single point whereas PP need to rebut all of them.

I think the strongest points for POPLA will be failure to invite the keeper to pay the charge as per PoFA 9(2)(e)(i). However that point is lost in the wall of text that tries to swamp the assessor with all the other, less relevant, PoFA breaches.

The other strong point is the one about the digitally altered image in the NtK which breaches the BPA CoP. It is the second image which has been obviously cropped. There was a recent POPLA appeal that was upheld on precisely this point. However, no reference to this is included and the OP should at least try and find the wording of that appeal which is in the POPLA appeals thread over on the MSE forum.

I don’t know why you haven’t included anything about the Consumer Rights Act 2015 relating to ‘prominence’ of terms and ‘consumer notices’. There’s a whole host of points you could raise:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/part/2/enacted
« Last Edit: March 28, 2024, 12:34:04 pm by b789 »
Why have we never see the headline "Psychic wins the lottery"?

DWMB2

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Karma: +27/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #41 on: March 28, 2024, 12:35:04 pm »
Quote
CoP v8 applied at the time.
Thanks for the correction - some of the content seems to be from an even earlier version so will need updating.

I think the signage point is also decent, but as b789 says I'd lose the part about a lack of lighting.

b789 also makes a good point in relation to a "Wall of text". Make use of paragraphs. Although this isn't a court defence, you may even wish to number the paragraphs as you would in a defence. The easier you can make it for the assessor the better.

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #42 on: March 28, 2024, 06:17:14 pm »
Many thanks.
I have effected the correction bar two points.
The recent POPLA judgement about digitally altered photos and the Consumer Rights Act.
I shall aim to do them latest tomorrow as I am delaying others waiting for me at the moment.

https://ibb.co/yBc8BBV

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Parking Charge Notice Received.
« Reply #43 on: March 28, 2024, 06:22:18 pm »
If anyone can please confirm my last day for submission.
Here is the back of the Ntk.

Thanks.

Strawberries007

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Almost Final Popla Appeal Premier Parking.
« Reply #44 on: March 29, 2024, 02:05:37 am »
My almost final Popla Appeal, thanks to everyone!