Britannia hospital parking Poole Options

[lord duckhunter]

The driver works at Poole hospital and has a permit to park in a NHS car park about half a mile from the hospital. When they work late till 10pm they park in the hospital car park as they dont want to walk that far in the dark. They have inspectors checking the cars and most turn a blind eye to staff parked in the wrong car park when it’s late. One or two don’t and many of the nurses and midwives have received tickets from these particular jobsworths.They just ignore the tickets and nobody has been taken to court yet. The driver received a ticket and just wants to ignore it. However , with help from this site, I successfully appealed a Britannia ticket via popla, and as this looks very similar want to go down that route to finish it once and for all.

It would be great if someone could advise if my appeal points are in order.

The driver received a ticket on the car on 23/8/17 and they just received the parking notice now on 13/11/17. Reading various articles this appears to be out of the timescales required , is that right?

Our successful popla appeal was due to Britannia not complying with POFA law regarding keeper liability. The letter received this time is exactly the same as the previous one. Our successful appeal was based on a camera, whereas this is a windscreen ticket. Does it make any difference regarding keeper liability, because the driver has been made aware of the ticket via it being put on the car at time of parking. If Britannia haven’t advised via the NTK that they’re going to seek payment from keeper, can we withhold drivers name as we did before.

Should previous successful appeal be mentioned in this appeal as the circumstances are the same, or will POPLA think we’re serial offenders and reject it.

Finally, the driver had a free car park pass for another Britannia controlled hospital car park, therefore they did not deprive Britannia of any money. They just parked in the wrong car park.

Any help would be greatly appreciated

This post has been edited by lord duckhunter: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 23:19

[Advertisement]

[ostell]

As there was a ticket on the windscreen they have to deliver the Notice to Keeper between day 28 and 56 after the event to hold the keeper liable. I think they've missed it somewhat.

A simple bogoff letter is needed

I am the registered keeper of car xxx and refer to PCN xxxxx which you have sent to me. You have failed to comply with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4, namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the Notice to Keeper within the relevant period specified in section 8 (4) & 8 (5) of the Act. You are therefore unable to hold me liable for the actions of the driver. I have no legal obligation to name the driver, and will not be doing so. As I have no liability I do not expect to hear from you again other than to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Edit you first post so that the identity of the driver cannot be inferred. Refer to the "The Driver...."

Have the staff associations not taking the hospital to task about expecting nurses to walk that distance at night and demand alternative solutions?

This post has been edited by ostell: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 07:40

[nosferatu1001]

Registered Keeper, no idea where preregister came from there Ostell

You ARE therefore unable...

[ostell]

Registered Keeper, no idea where preregister came from there Ostell

You ARE therefore unable...

Too early in the morning for me, fingers not obeying brain. Edited.

[lord duckhunter]

Have the staff associations not taking the hospital to task about expecting nurses to walk that distance at night and demand alternative solutions?

They’ve tried , but they’re banging their heads against a brick wall. Some of them have permits near hospital, but some don’t. As I said in opening post of the ticket guys turn a blind eye provided they’re showing a permit even if it’s for wrong car park. The driver probably does 2 late nights a week and has had one ticket in 6 months. Most of the girls ignore them, but this looked such an easy win it was better to appeal and get rid of it.

This post has been edited by lord duckhunter: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 - 23:20

[ostell]

And please do as instructed and edit your first post as requested in post #2 otherwise you could be getting a loss instead of a certain victory. If they have failed POFA to hold the keeper liabel thn they can still come after the driver if they know who it is. And they are known to read the forums.

[lord duckhunter]

And please do as instructed and edit your first post as requested in post #2 otherwise you could be getting a loss instead of a certain victory. If they have failed POFA to hold the keeper liabel thn they can still come after the driver if they know who it is. And they are known to read the forums.

Thanks. Also just dawned on me that if the driver makes having a permit for another area in the hospital ( and therefore not depriving Britannia of money) part of the appeal, they are identifying themselves, because the permits are issued to staff only.

I'll stick with NTK not served in correct timescales and no mention of keeper liability if drivers name not provided.

This is such a great site to help people. Thanks

[ostell]

I don't understand. You tell them that you are not and will not provide the drivers details. The keeper has no liability anyway but some PPCs try to wheedle the driver's name out of the keeper.

[nosferatu1001]

Stating the vehicle displayed a permit, does not identify the individual.

[lord duckhunter]

Stating the vehicle displayed a permit, does not identify the individual.

The permit displayed is issued to staff and the permit number is linked to staff members name.

[SchoolRunMum]

But the permit holder could be car-sharing or being driven by a relative who actually parked up, NHS worker being the passenger that day. They do not know and cannot assume who the driver was. The car is permitted, because it transports a worker. That's all.

[nosferatu1001]

Stating the vehicle displayed a permit, does not identify the individual.

The permit displayed is issued to staff and the permit number is linked to staff members name.

Yes
And?

Stating there WAS a permit in the vehicle, and nothing else, cannot possibly identify who the permit was issued to.
Supplying a copy with the name or ID blocked out , ditto.

[ostell]

Why bring the permit into the argument at all? Was it mentioned in any of the paperwork?