Premier Park PCN |
Premier Park PCN |
Sun, 15 Jul 2018 - 00:16
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Hi all,
Just after a few quick pointers please, in the past couple of weeks I have had a PCN throught from Premier Park relating to a visit to Brixham Marina car park which uses ANPR but issues tickets that are easily mistaken for being Pay and Display if the driver isn't paying attention. The PCN was received within a week of parking. The PCN makes Premier Parks usual mistake of stating "if within 29 days" etc More importantly the PCN states it was issued for the reason "Whole period of parking not paid for" This is not true and the printed ticket clearly shows that 4 hours were paid for (although the driver beleives that 5 hours worth of coins were fed into the machine) and the correct reg no is printed on the ticket. Unfortunately the missing 5th hour has resulted in a 25 minute overstay but the PCN only mentions whole period not paid for, Any advice on the next course of action would be appreciated. Thanks |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sun, 15 Jul 2018 - 00:16
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Sun, 15 Jul 2018 - 15:20
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 647 Joined: 10 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,458 |
Appeal to PP as RK. Put the case as you have already explained and send a copy of the ticket. As you don't have proof that the driver paid for 5 hours rather than just four then PP will turn down the appeal. The next stage after that will be POPLA who will more than likely turn down your appeal because they will argue that the PCN was correctly issued.
Your situation was similar to mine with PP and I lost my POPLA appeal. I stuck it out and refused to pay. They eventually gave up when they realised that was not going to pay short of a successful court case. They always threaten court action but rarely take it that far because they lose money if they do! |
|
|
Mon, 16 Jul 2018 - 15:15
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Thanks yes will appeal it. Does their incorrectly stated while period not paid for have any material effect?
|
|
|
Mon, 16 Jul 2018 - 15:28
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 193 Joined: 4 Feb 2010 Member No.: 35,381 |
Hi Bendo
If you have the time look at my thread re: Tesco Express and ESSO Petrol Station. Scenario very much the same I believe in terms of the position re: POFA (it's currently just above this thread but for future ref here: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=120935 ) Might be a good idea to put up any Notices etc too but obviously redacted. This post has been edited by GIBZY: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 - 15:33 |
|
|
Mon, 16 Jul 2018 - 15:37
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Brixham, as a harbour, has byelaws. Can you do a check that the car park that the car was in was an area covered by the byelaws. If that is the case then there can be no keeper liability.
|
|
|
Thu, 16 Aug 2018 - 15:25
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Well I appealed it on the basis that the NTK wasn't compliant with pofa as it didn't accurately state the period that wasn't paid for as per the legislation and as expected they denied the appeal. Also did a SAR which showed that they had recorded the payment correctly so knew full well the disputed period was 24 mins not 4 hours 28 mins as per the NTK.
Half tempted to not bother with POPLA and tell them to go away and if they believe keeper liability applies despite their failings to initiate court proceedings. |
|
|
Thu, 16 Aug 2018 - 15:43
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Appeal to POPLA to save you a lot of hassle later.
Did you ever find out if Byelaws applied where the car was parked? |
|
|
Thu, 16 Aug 2018 - 16:22
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Couldn't find anything about bylaws and the car park itself looks relatively new although street view suggests its at least 10 years old. , Idid find a thread on MSE that suggests the council own the land not Marina Developments.
|
|
|
Thu, 16 Aug 2018 - 17:58
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 647 Joined: 10 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,458 |
POPLA will just say that the PCN was correctly issued as there is no evidence that 5 hours was paid for. I would still recommend POPLA because it doesn't cost you anything but it does cost the PPC. It is always pleasing to see them losing money! You might also learn something that will be useful later. PP put a lot of effort into their POPLA appeals and so they show their hand. For example in my case they submitted a copy of the landowner's contract which was out if validity!
|
|
|
Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 08:43
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Maca -= how about if they include the SAR evidence to show that the NtK was issued for a period of... unpaid, when the actual period unpaid was at MOST ...
This means the PCN was NOT issued correctly, and they knew it I woudl try it on that basis, please no keeper liability. it makes it uncomfortable for the operator I would also of course complain to the BPA - the operator has lied. Their own records confirm this. |
|
|
Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 08:47
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 647 Joined: 10 Oct 2017 Member No.: 94,458 |
Anything that makes life difficult or uncomfortable for the operator is worth doing! If it also increases the chances of winning then all the better! I just have a jaundiced view of POPLA.
This post has been edited by Macapaca: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 08:49 |
|
|
Fri, 17 Aug 2018 - 09:25
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
I would go for the POPLA appeal and demand that Premier produces the contract for the location
If they're running to form, they'll produce a witness statement on behalf of MDL It will be signed by a Premier employee and the company they call MDL won't actually exist You can then inform POPLA of the fact and, when the appeal is rejected, complain to the British Parking Association It will leave Premier with the expense of a POPLA win that's of zero use to them In the event of legal action, they would have to explain to the Court why they submitted a fake witness statement to their trade association's appeal body |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 13:57
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
They finally replied to the appeal and ignored 3 of my 4 points, instead electing to waffle on about signage in a 37 page pdf. I never even raised the issue of signage.
I've responded and pointed out that they have failed to address the points and send 35 pages of templated nonsense. Bit of a farce that they tell us not to use a templated appeal yet accept a templated of nonsense from the operator. Also just noticed that once you do a reply on POPLA it hides the attached evidence from the operator, managed to pull them out of my cache for future reference. If Popla deny the appeal, I think my next option will be to request that PP remove my personal data as I don't feel they have a legitemate interest in holding my PI and if they don't agree then they should either initiate a claim or comply with the deletion request. |
|
|
Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 11:48
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Just had an email from POPLA to say they have made a decision and it is available to view in the portal, but portal still shows appeal in progress.
I guess that alone speaks volumes of the quality of POPLA. I'm surprised the Ombudsman service has put it's name to this Kangaroo court. Hopefully I'll find out the decision soon, but I've got my GDPR article 17 erasure request written up ready (giving them a month to either comply with the request or initiate a claim) in anticipate of a POPLA loss. |
|
|
Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 10:38
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Give them a call. They should sort it.
|
|
|
Mon, 22 Oct 2018 - 11:01
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Checked the day after, typical POPLA decision ignored most of the points made some reference to signage (which I never even apealed on) and ignored the fact the authorisation appears to be from a random named company that isn't MDL.
I have since sent Premier Park an erasure request under GDPR article 17 stating if they feel that they have a right to old my personal information, they should initiate a claim before the expiry of the calendar month. In the meantime they have wasted some paper, ink, an envelope and a first class stamp sending me a letter to say my POPLA appeal has failed and the charge is now due, no mention of it only being binding on them. Looking forward to seeing what happens, suspect it will be nothing and a complain to the ICO. |
|
|
Mon, 22 Oct 2018 - 12:50
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Please post the ful l decision
Suggests a complaint could be in order. If points were not considered then thats a procedural error. |
|
|
Sat, 25 May 2019 - 22:20
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Just thought I'd give a quick update on this one. I couldn't be bothered disputing it with Popla they have shown themselves to be not fit for purpose.
Instead I went ahead with the article 17 request stating that they had no legitimate interest and they should erase the details with a month or initiate a claim. After about 20 days, I chased them up reminding them that the were running out of time and received a short reply back stating they wouldn't be deleting the data. I replied back reiterating that after the month was up I'd be making a complaint with the ICO. Shortly after the 30 days was up, I received court papers and responded accordingly that I'd be defending it and pointed out that I'd had no LBA. They claimed to have sent one and promised to resend. What turned up was clearly a standard template as it referenced that I'd had numerous communication from their debt collectors which obviously isn't the case. Says a lot about their outfit if you ask me. They had ticked they would do mediation so felt I should do the same so as to demonstrate that I'd been reasonable. I offered a fiver and asva reasonable person, increased my offer to a very generous tenner, alas they wanted some ridiculous sum over 150 at which point I suggested to the mediator they were not being reasonable and suggested we leave it there. It was eventually allocated to St Helens family Court with a date of 8th August, quite looking forward to it I booked the day off. About a week ago they sent me a letter offering a final settlement of £115. It was duly filed and ignored. Evidence etc was due to be filed with the court by the 31st May and I'd planned to do it this weekend however today I've received a letter from then stating they are discontinuing. I'll call the court on Tuesday to confirm. My next step is another SAR to give them something to do and then another erasure request following that and a complaint to DVLA not that it will do anything other than provide some satisfaction. |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 19:32
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25 Joined: 17 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,441 |
Well the SARs turned up today (all 200 odd pages) sent via signed for mail, one small parcel and one large letter so another few quid down the drain for them. Forced them to do a bit of chasing with the erasure request as they had to find out how long their backups were kept etc.
As far as I'm concerned now it's case closed and ultimately my tactic of erase my data or take me to court worked well as I won't have to deal with endless letters and empty threats for the next 6 years from all manner of scummy entities. I was quite happy to go to court if it came to that, indeed I was quite looking forward to it, must remember to cancel the days holiday I'd booked for it. This post has been edited by Bendo: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 19:33 |
|
|
Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 20:28
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 10,695 Joined: 23 Apr 2004 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 1,131 |
So they issued a claim shortly after the POPLA verdict?
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 19:06 |