Free Traffic Legal Advice

Hi There,

I got a parking ticket last month for parking outside my hours as opposed to the designated bays.

I basically live in a housing area (New Build) where the parking bays aren't outside my property but in a designated bay area away from the house. Its private bays but the majority of houses are like this. We are all freeholders so we bought the house.

Im a Type 1 Diabetic and when i was coming home in June, i felt myself going low on sugar. The DVLA regulations and the Road Traffic Act 1988 requires that, under certain health conditions, a driver must stop driving immediately to ensure both personal and public safety. As my bay is away from the house and i was 1 minute from home, i decided to park outside my house which i can quickly access and run inside and got the sugar until the blood sugar came back to level.
The DVLA also specifically advises that individuals in such a state should not drive for 45 minutes after their blood glucose levels return to normal.

So, as i waited for my 45 minutes to pass, during that time, i got a parking ticket. I appealed to it on those grounds and it got rejected. So it went to POPLA ( POPLA is an independent appeals service for Parking Charge Notices issued on private land).
To which they also rejected, i rang them up and they said the Road traffic act or driving legalities do not adhere when parking on private land. (Which is weird because i bought the house and a management company decided to take it on a few years later to govern the area, keep the area clean etc).

However in my opinion they prey on current residents and give parking tickets freely to residents and others who are not allowed to park here.

Now i don't understand what im supposed to do. POPLA has rejected my claim and i was just complying with what ive been taught and told to do as a driver and a diabetic.
Money isn't an issue but i feel a bit robbed because my condition forced me to park outside my property to treat myself and im being penalised for it.

POPLA have said that i can go to Citizens Advice for legal cover or i have to pay up.

What are my options? I feel a bit betrayed and upset purely because i'm a diabetic.

The company that runs the area is PMUK (https://pm-uk.com/)

Thanks in Advanced,

Thank you so much for your reply.
I was unaware of this forum until after someone informed me yesterday to which Popla had made their verdict.

Was the PPC contracted at the location before you purchased the property or were they brought in by the management company after? If so, how was parking managed before they were contracted?

- There was a different management company before PMUK but they basically did the same thing. The contract was just given to a different company a few years ago

In a worst case scenario, if it did go all the way to a hearing and you lost, you won’t get a CCJ on your record as long as the judgment amount was paid in full within 30 days. Even then, the amount would be for less than the original claim as any fake added on damages are not allowed in the small claims track
  - So if it did go to court and i lost. Would i also be liable to court fees then? Or just the fine (£100).


Here is my appeal to Popla (Im unable to get the full transcript but they provide a "Assessor summary of your case"
The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal: • They are diabetic and on the day of the incident they experienced a hypoglycemic episode and they needed to take steps to rectify this. • The Road Traffic Act and the DVLA specify that motorists are not allowed to drive under these conditions. • The operator is not considering this and has not considered the Equalities Act 2010 or Section 92 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. • They have attached a letter from a health care provider and they are happy to provided any further evidence if required. The appellant has provided evidence of their condition to support their appeal.


This is what POPLA replied with:

When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The operator has provided evidence of the vehicle parked on the site on the day in question. I note the appellant’s grounds of appeal and I have reviewed the evidence of the vehicle parked on the site and the signage provided by the operator. The British Parking Association Code of Practice sets the standards by which its members must abide by. Section 19.3 of the code states that signs must be placed throughout the car park so that drivers have the chance to review the terms and conditions. The code confirms that these signs must be conspicuous and legible and written in intelligible language so that they are easy to see read and understand. The operator has provided multiple images of the signs within the car park and after reviewing these, I am satisfied that there are plenty of signs located within the car park and that these signs meet the requirements of section 19.3 of the Code of Practice. The signage on the site is clear in that vehicles parked outside of marked bays are in breach of the terms and conditions. The appellant has advised that the operator has not complied with The Road Traffic Act and the DVLA specifies that motorists are not allowed to drive under these conditions. I note the appellant’s comments however as the vehicle was parked on private land, the Road Traffic Act or any other regulations do not apply. POPLA does consider whether issues of discrimination have had an effect on the parking contract. We know that the Equality Act specifically protects disabled people from unfavourable treatment, and this does apply during the provision of services such as parking. In order to assess what effect the Equality Act had in the present case, we would need to be satisfied that there had been unfavourable treatment, and that a disability was one of the reasons driving the unfavourable treatment. I do not consider that the operator has applied any unfavourable treatment. I do not consider that the operator has demonstrated any breach of the Equality Act 2010, nor do I understand why the appellant believed this was the case. For clarity, any motorist parking in breach of the conditions of the parking contract would have been issued with a PCN. I acknowledge that the appellant is diabetic and I understand the seriousness of a hypoglycemic episode. I feel it is important in this case to highlight POPLA’s role. As an assessor my role is to consider if a parking charge has been issued correctly in line with the terms and conditions of the car park, evidence provided by both parties, relevant law, and the British Parking Association (BPA)’s Code of Practice, if applicable. Whilst I do appreciate that terms and conditions on occasion may not be followed due to circumstances outside of a motorist’s control, it is not within my power to allow an appeal on mitigating circumstances alone. The appellant has offered further evidence however the opportunity for either party to provide further evidence has now passed. It is not the role of the assessor to collect evidence or contact witnesses. They will look at the evidence that is provided to them from both parties and make a decision based on this alone. After considering the evidence from both parties the vehicle was parked outside of the markings of a bay or space and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. Based on the evidence provided, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly therefore, I must refuse the appeal.


This is the sign outside my property. (I can't upload the image it says max reached)

What have PMUK said about this when you complained to them?
I did write to PMUK to cancel it (On the same grounds as did for POPLA saying im a diabetic and i had to get indoors quick to get sugar.
Their reply was

Dear {redacted},
Thank you for your email.
PMUK are unable to cancel parking notices have you sent your appeal to P4 Parking?
complaints@p4parking.co.uk
Many thanks.
Kind Regards,

So, what does your lease say about parking? What does it say about requiring a permit to park? What does it say about any third party that is not a signatory to the lease being able to fetter any rights to your quiet enjoyment?

This is the letter that is sent out to all occupants at the area (which we got too) I have blurred out sensitive information such as my address and name the letter is addressed to.

https://imgur.com/a/5A5qdXs


Were P4 Parking "brought in" before or after you purchased the property?
They were brought it after we bought the property. When we bought the property there was a different company here prior to PMUK doing the same things (Governing the area etc).

Why were the previous PPC removed?
Honestly i have no idea. I can call them to find out if that information will help me (If so, any other information i can ask them too?). We just got a letter through one day saying they're taking over.

Can i contact them to tell them that

They are in breach of the BPA CoP at 2.4, 19.8. & Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013.

Question: Does that give me grounds to tell them to cancel the PCN OR i will report them

or

Tell them this is in breach of BPA CoP at 2.4, 19.8 & Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013 which means they have to cancel the PCN AND also report them.

Thanks

You say your properly is a freehold house and the parking space is a distance away from your property. You also parked outside your house.

Do you know the boundaries of your land. You should hopefully have that from the conveyance. If you don't you should be able to get it from the land registry for a small fee.

In some developments with mixed freehold houses and leasehold blocks of flats the roadways are owned by the adjacent houses.

I have a big document at home which highlights what we own.
Let me look for it and see what it highlights.

Basically outside out house is

House | Pavement | road | Bays for parking (This is looking as if your standing outside out front door)

You have not answered the question about your lease and what does it say and not say about parking. A letter from a management company cannot alter or vary what is in your lease.

If the property is indeed a freehold house there won't be one for that. It's unclear what OP may have a lease over.

That doesn't detract from the other points though, but if it turns out OP was parked on land they happen to own or one of the other houses does and isn't part of the common areas managed by the management co then from whom have the parking company acquired their purported rights.

Quote from: b789 on July 12, 2024, 11:33:16 am

You have not answered the question about your lease and what does it say and not say about parking. A letter from a management company cannot alter or vary what is in your lease.

If the property is indeed a freehold house there won't be one for that. It's unclear what OP may have a lease over.

That doesn't detract from the other points though, but if it turns out OP was parked on land they happen to own or one of the other houses does and isn't part of the common areas managed by the management co then from whom have the parking company acquired their purported rights.

Yeah we own the property as Freehold. (2 bed house)

The letter the OP has shared is headed "Circulated to all leaseholders", which suggests the OP holds some sort of lease (perhaps a separate agreement covering the relevant parking space(s)).

Does this not apply to me then as i'm a freeholder? Or are we comparing Apples to potatoes here and the words are similar but have different meanings.

Thanks

They have just sent it to everybody.

Trying to figure out who owns the land you were parked on may make sense, any right to enforce will flow from an agreement with the freeholder of that land.

I can try and find out, let me send a couple of emails
Thank you