Author Topic: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford (Read 872 times)

bdu7 · « **on:** June 19, 2024, 12:49:40 pm »

Hi all,
The car park in question is next to a McDonalds and KFC. The car was parked on the 'KFC side' for 18 minutes whilst the driver was inside McDonalds.
It turns out that the car park is effectively 'closed' until 10am, despite being on a retail park that was fully open.
The vehicle is registered to my company (Director), and I received the attached PCN on 19/06.

Link to images and letter

Dave65 · « **Reply #1 on:** June 20, 2024, 10:26:38 am »

When you say I received the PPN, who was it addressed to?
Was it addressed to the company name?
Is the vehicle on lease?

bdu7 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 20, 2024, 12:42:33 pm »

Hi,
Yes, the PCN is addressed to the company name, and the vehicle is for use by employees.

No, the vehicle has been purchased by the company, it isn't a lease.

Thanks

bdu7 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 25, 2024, 12:36:56 pm »

Hi all,

Apologies as this isn't something I have dealt with before. What would be our next steps for this penalty charge notice?

Many thanks

b789 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 25, 2024, 05:59:52 pm »

It's not a Penalty Charge Notice. It's a Parking Charge Notice. Big difference.

Only an authority such as a council or the police can issue a penalty charge. An unregulated private parking company can only issue a Parking Charge Notice which is an officious way of avoiding its real name... an invoice.

The sign you have shown us clearly states that parking outside of the hours advised is verboten. Was the car park for KFC and it did not open until 10am but you parked there and went to the McDs which is a separate car park? How are the two car parks delineated? Are they both operated by PE? What do the signs for the McDs car park state?

b789 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 25, 2024, 06:10:52 pm »

It is unlikely that PE will uphold an appeal but you'd have a better chance with POPLA. I would suggest you send the following appeal in the name of the company without identifying the driver. The reason is that there's a technical flaw in the NtK as they have not fully complied with the requirements of PoFA 9(2)(e)(i) as there is no invitation (nor any synonym of the word) for the keeper to pay the charge.

This is an appeal on behalf of [Your Company Name] regarding Parking Charge Notice [PCN Reference Number] issued to vehicle [Vehicle Registration Number] on [Date of Incident].

Upon reviewing the Notice to Keeper (NtK), we have identified that it does not comply with the requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA), Schedule 4. Specifically, the NtK fails to include the mandatory invitation to the keeper to pay the unpaid parking charge, as required by PoFA 9(2)(e)(i).

Due to this omission, the Notice to Keeper is not compliant with PoFA, and as such, [Your Company Name], as the registered keeper of the vehicle, is not liable for the alleged parking charge. Furthermore, we are not obliged to identify the driver at the time of the incident.

Based on the above points, we request that you cancel the Parking Charge Notice immediately. If you do not cancel the charge, please provide a POPLA code so that we may refer this matter to the independent appeals service.

We look forward to your prompt confirmation that this Parking Charge Notice has been cancelled.

bdu7 · « **Reply #6 on:** June 25, 2024, 09:56:24 pm »

Really appreciate that, thank you!

bdu7 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2024, 12:04:47 pm »

Hi all,

So I have, as expected, received a response from Parkingeye that my appeal was rejected and they have provided a POPLA code.

Link to appeal reply
(Apologies, I'm unable to upload directly to this post for some reason)

Can you please advise what my next steps are?

I assume an appeal to POPLA along the same lines?

Many thanks

b789 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2024, 01:19:32 pm »

On the 25th June, I asked the following questions which you never answered:

The sign you have shown us clearly states that parking outside of the hours advised is verboten. Was the car park for KFC and it did not open until 10am but you parked there and went to the McDs which is a separate car park? How are the two car parks delineated? Are they both operated by PE? What do the signs for the McDs car park state?

Interestingly, the new Joint CoP recently published and according to their blurb, became effective on the 27th June 2024, has a clause at 17.2.1 which states:

17.2. Parking Charges

17.2.1. All parking charges which are issued including:

a) Unique identifier (Parking Charge Number)
b) Date of contravention
c) Time of contravention
d) Date of issue of first notice
e) Location including outward postcode
f) Reason for issue (contravention)
g) Status
Paid at the appeals charter reduced rate, paid at the reduced
rate, paid full rate, cancelled, unpaid, paid at escalation stage.

Does your NtK state the post code of the location of the alleged breach of contract?

bdu7 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2024, 02:40:41 pm »

My apologies b789 I must have missed that when replying last.
I've attached a map of the layout of the parking at this location. There are two car park areas in that part of the retail park. You are correct, the car was parked on the 'KFC side' (blue), and the driver went to McDonalds - which also has it's own parking area but that seems to be part of the drive thru. I'm not aware of any signs in the other parking area (red), and the driver won't be going back there for quite a while to check. There also isn't anything indicative on google maps unfortunately.

Parking areas

The NtK simply states 'KFC ELLESMERE CENTRE, WALKDEN' there is no postcode listed anywhere within their documentation.

Thanks

bdu7 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 19, 2024, 01:24:45 pm »

Hi,

Sorry to bump this topic back up again

I'm just after some advice on my next steps now that I have received this reply from the parking company.
do I go to POPLA with the same argument, adding in the lack of postcode information, or do I need to add something else to this appeal too?

Many thanks

b789 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 19, 2024, 04:08:18 pm »

You go to POPLA with as much as possible, including, but not limited to:

1. The NtK failed to fully comply with all the requirements of PoFA to hold the keeper liable.
2. The operator has not shown that the person they are pursuing is the driver.
3. The signage is deficient and there are no ground markings to delineate the different car parks which have different terms.
4. The operator does not have valid contract flowing from the landowner to be able to issue PCNs in its own name.
5. The operator has breached the joint Code of Practice by failing to denied the location ad the relevant land in their NtK.

Start to put something together with those points and show us before you send anything. You can do a bit of your own research with PoFA and the BPA/IPC joint CoP.

DWMB2 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 19, 2024, 04:19:15 pm »

Quote

You can do a bit of your own research with PoFA and the BPA/IPC joint CoP.

It may also be wise to refer to the old BPA Code of Practice that was in force at the time of the parking incident. That way, you can try to head of any arguments of "We can't be expected to have complied with a Code of Practice that hadn't even been published at the time".

bdu7 · « **Reply #13 on:** July 22, 2024, 02:31:39 pm »

Hi all,

My appeal to POPLA is as follows. Your advice and guidance is much appreciated

Dear Sir/Madam,

This is an appeal on behalf of COMPANY regarding Parking Charge Notice XXXXXXXXX issued to vehicle VRM on DATE under POPLA Code XXXXXXXXXX.

The appeal is based on the following grounds;

1.   The Notice to Keeper failed to fully comply with all of the requirements of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to hold the keeper liable. It did not include a mandatory invitation to the keeper to pay the unpaid parking charge, as required by section 9(2)(e)(i) of the Act, section 20.11 of the Code of Practice 2018.
2.   The operator has not shown that the person they are pursuing is the driver,
3.   The signage is deficient and there are no ground markings to delineate the different car parks which have different terms,
4.   The operator does not have valid contract flowing from the landowner to be able to issue PCN’s in its own name,
5.   The operator has breached the joint Code of Practice by failing to identify the location and the relevant land in their Notice to Keeper as per section 17.2.1.e

Based on the above points, we request that the appeal is upheld and the Parking Charge Notice is cancelled.

We look forward to your prompt response.

Many thanks

b789 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 22, 2024, 02:45:20 pm »

You will need to expand on each point and lead the assessor through the reasons why each point is valid.

Free Traffic Legal Advice

Author Topic: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford (Read 872 times)

bdu7

Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

Dave65

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

bdu7

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

bdu7

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

b789

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

b789

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

bdu7

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

bdu7

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

b789

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

bdu7

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

bdu7

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

b789

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

DWMB2

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

bdu7

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford

b789

Re: Parking Eye PCN - 0 Hours 0 Minutes - KFC Walkden, Salford