3. Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.  (Read 1316 times)

0 Members and 391 Guests are viewing this topic.

Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« on: »
Hello all,

Thank you for any tips or advice in advance :-)

The driver (who is actually not the keeper) uses this carpark on a near daily basis, and uses it in several vehicles. Parking is always paid for using the Ringo app.

On this occasion the driver has paid for parking via Ringo but has selected the wrong vehicle in the Ringo app (there are 4 vehicles linked on their Ringo app). Completely the error of the driver, really silly and really annoying - no one else to blame.

There is a receipt for payment for the parking period, with times that match up *to the minute* with the ANPR entry and exit times - just with the wrong reg! The vehicle reg used in error to pay is another car regularly parked there (and have receipts to prove that too!)

There are also literally thousands of other receipts (totalling thousand of pounds!) where parking was paid for correctly for the both vehicles, where the correct vehicle was selected.

Given that the owner of the carpark, nor Ringo, nor Ocean Parking have suffered a financial loss - and the error was a minor clerical oversight of a loyal paying customer - What would the appeal be?

The signage looks acceptable, ticket was issued correctly (after all they were not to know the driver is a bafoon and pressed the wrong button!), but the parking stay was actually paid for, besides an honest mistake, so there is no financial loss.

Pics below - Thank you in advance for any advice :-)

Peter.

https://imgur.com/a/HkywlSx
https://imgur.com/a/WRZOQHq
https://imgur.com/a/FHB9oEM



« Last Edit: August 16, 2024, 10:23:16 am by VexedPete »
Logged

Share on Bluesky Share on Facebook

Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #1 on: »
It is a common mistake. If you look at the new Joint Code of Practice, Section F.3(a) which states:

Quote
F.3 Appeals where the charge should be reduced to £20 for a period of 14 days

In considering appeals parking operators must recognise the below case types as mitigating circumstances warranting a reduction in the amount of the parking charge to £20 for 14 days, subject to appropriate evidence being provided. This reduction applies only for the first parking charge issued to the vehicle for the specific contravention, where payment is made within 14 days and where no independent appeal is lodged.

a) where the driver has paid the tariff but made a major keying error when registering their vehicle for example, letters wrong or missing; characters swapped; motorist entered the wrong car registration (e.g. their previous car or another vehicle from their household);

So you need to appeal on that basis and they should reissue the PCN at the reduced rate of £20 if paid within 14 days of service of the notice.

Joint Code of Practice
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #2 on: »

Thanks b789,

That is super helpful, and sounds very reasonable - still annoying, but happy to pay £20.

I am actually on holiday for 2 weeks from early next week and I would hate to miss a deadline because of that...

Should I ask for the notice to be re-issued, or write to them with the evidence and including a cheque for £20 do you think?

I guess a deciding factor would be; does the 14 days restart from the issue of the adjusted PCN? (in which case I can safely do that) or;
Is it 14 days of the original PCN? (in which case I will definitely not be able to pay the £20 within 14 days so I had probably better write with an enclosed cheque?)

Cheers,

Pete.
Logged
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #3 on: »
What does the NtK say about appealing? Just follow the instructions on there. Do it by email. Cheques? Do people still use them? Can you not simply pay by bank transfer?

If they respond by email, you can do the transaction on line from anywhere in the world if you have internet access.

Just remember to quote their CoP at them.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #4 on: »

Thanks!

Cheques still exist (for the moment) - Ocean Parking certainly accept them :-)

Payments:
Sadly there is no bank transfer option.
Online or on the phone doesn't give me the option to change the amount.
Or I can enclose a cheque or postal order to a postal address.

Appeals;
I have an email address, telephone number, postal address or online portal.

I think given my holiday situation and risk of not being able to pay in time I will write an appeal + enclose a cheque. If that is refused then I will be vehemently defending the below position anyway so the 14 days to pay is less critical. If it's accepted, happy days - £20 is fair and I'm happy to pay it.


Dear Ocean Parking,

Ref PCN XXXXXX
Registration XXXX

Please accept my apologies, I made an error when paying for parking. I paid for the duration of my stay, but I did so under a registration number of another vehicle in my household - both of which are regularly parked in Botley Mills (almost daily).

As proof please find enclosed:
 - A screen shot of the Ringo app with the various registration numbers in the household.
 - A receipt for the parking stay in question which covers the full duration of the stay, all be it associated with the wrong car.

As such I also enclose a cheque for £20 as these mitigating circumstances must be recognised as warranting a reduction in the amount of the parking charge. I have copied the relevant section of the new Joint Code of Practice, Section F.3(a) below which states:

"F.3 Appeals where the charge should be reduced to £20 for a period of 14 days
In considering appeals parking operators must recognise the below case types as mitigating circumstances warranting a reduction in the amount of the parking charge to £20 for 14 days, subject to appropriate evidence being provided. This reduction applies only for the first parking charge issued to the vehicle for the specific contravention, where payment is made within 14 days and where no independent appeal is lodged.

a) where the driver has paid the tariff but made a major keying error when registering their vehicle for example, letters wrong or missing; characters swapped; motorist entered the wrong car registration (e.g. their previous car or another vehicle from their household);"

If you require anything else then please come back to me, otherwise please accept this as an appeal to reduce the charge and full & final payment of that charge.

Best Regards,

Peter.
Logged
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #5 on: »
Give it a go and see how they respond. You are dealing with intellectually malnourished people who are more often than not blinded by their greed which is influenced by their past as ex-clampers.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #6 on: »
Setting aside the editorial comment, OP why has the keeper now become the driver? As it stands the PCN looks as if it complies with PoFA and therefore the distinction is somewhat academic, but you never know!

If you were the driver and want to admit to this, OK. If not, then I would stick to facts i.e. not 'I' but the driver. Always the driver.

Logged
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #7 on: »
I don't disagree with the above statement. However, the NtK is not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA and only the driver is liable. As the keeper you are under no legal requirement to identify the driver.

The reason the NtK is not fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA is explained in the following:

Quote
In order to understand how the parking charge notice might fail to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012), specifically Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i), it's essential to break down the legal requirements and analyse the content of the NtK.

Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) of PoFA 2012

This paragraph mandates that for a parking operator to hold the vehicle's registered keeper liable for a parking charge, the notice to the keeper must include:

An "Invitation to Pay": The notice must explicitly invite the keeper to pay the unpaid parking charges.

Exact Wording: The wording must clearly convey this invitation, and mere implication or indirect suggestions are insufficient. The act requires strict compliance, meaning that any failure to fully incorporate this invitation could render the notice non-compliant.

Non-Compliance Issue

If the parking charge notice fails to include a clear "invitation to pay," or any synonym of the word "invitation," this omission is a breach of Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i). Even if the notice suggests that payment is required, without an explicit invitation directed towards the keeper to settle the charge, the notice does not meet the exacting requirements of PoFA 2012.

Significance of Full Compliance

Strict Liability: The law mandates full and exact compliance with the specified wording and content outlined in PoFA 2012.

Partial or Substantial Compliance Insufficient: Even if the notice largely complies with other requirements, the absence of a clear invitation to the keeper to pay is a significant flaw. The operator cannot rely on partial or substantial compliance — every element as specified in the legislation must be present and correct.

Consequences for the Operator

Challenge Basis: If the notice is found to lack this crucial element, it can be used as a basis to challenge the parking charge.

Keeper Liability: The operator cannot transfer liability to the keeper, which significantly weakens their case if the notice to the driver or other requirements are also flawed or if the driver is unknown.

Conclusion

In summary, a parking charge notice that does not include an explicit "invitation" for the keeper to pay the charge is not fully compliant with Schedule 4, Paragraph 9(2)(e)(i) of PoFA 2012. Since the law demands strict adherence, any omission, even if minor, invalidates the notice and relieves the keeper of any obligation to pay as long as the driver is not identified.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #8 on: »
Thanks b789 - noted  ;D


H C Anderson, thank you - the keeper is *not* the driver. I am not the keeper...  it's like a riddle!  :D

My only thought about not concealing who the driver is that because it may seem a bit shady trying to conceal it which may make the argument look weaker if it were to go further? That said, they are greedy and it never hurts to have a little extra anonymity.... I shall change it, thank you.
As this exact scenario is cited within the Code of Practice and it uses the words "operators ***must*** recognise...." it's a pretty watertight case on its own for the reduced amount (which the driver is happy with).

Pete.
Logged
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #9 on: »
Correction: will *definitely* refer to the driver as the driver.


Thank you all again :-)
Logged
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #10 on: »
If you are not the keeper, in whose name is the PCN? Only the person named in the PCN can appeal. If you were not the driver or the keeper, I do not understand how you can be the person who has received the PCN.

The keeper is not "concealing" the drivers identity. They are simply declining to provide it as there is no legal obligation, whatsoever, for the keeper to provide that information to an unregulated private parking company.

The PPC is not any "authority" that has powers to require the keeper to identify the driver like the police. The PPC is simply a private company which is why they cannot issue "penalties" or "fines" and no "offence" has been committed.

So, please explain how it is that the person named on the PCN is neither the keeper or the driver.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #11 on: »
I am not the keeper (it’s my partners car).


I am the driver (although I didn’t want to outright say that as the forum instructions say not to identify the driver.)

The letter does say to the keeper “if you are not the driver to pass the PCN onto the driver” - which is what has happened, and now I am the one appealing it.


Logged
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #12 on: »
You cannot simply appeal it, whether you are the driver or not. The keeper, the named person on the NtK, has to also sign the declaration.

However, you don’t seem to have grasped the concept of “no keeper liability” if the driver is not identified to the PPC. The driver is always liable. If they know who the driver is, then PoFA does not apply.

If they don’t know who the driver is and they have issued an NtK that is fully compliant with all the requirements of PoFA, then they can transfer that liability to the keeper.

Anyway, if the keeper is happy to transfer liability to you, the driver, then they have to not only give your the NtK but they also have to declares that they were not the driver and name you. Only after that can you appeal.
Logged
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience” - Mark Twain
Re: Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.
« Reply #13 on: »
It's taken a while but I think I now understand! Thank you again!



Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »
  3. Parking paid for, but wrong reg on Ringo! - Ocean Parking, Botley Hants.