PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

London Docklands Smart Parking PCN
broodoo
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 10:11
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,420



Hello, complete newbie here, just got done reading the main sticky on how to handle these tickets but just want some advice on my circumstances.

Last week the driver parked in a disabled bay (with a blue badge) outside a sports store in the docklands through an open gate with a cctv sign on it. Inside there wasn't any more signage that could be seen and left the car there for a few hours while they checked into a nearby hotel and arranged some other business. Then as we left a little later in the week (they'd been parking my car in a multi-story around the corner) the driver parked there again to move stuff from the room to the car.

I received two letters from smart parking yesterday saying I owed them 60 quid twice; once for the few hours then the next for 20 mins. The driver had no clue that it was private land as the buildings in the site looked commercial.

How do I appeal this? I ask because I don't know much about this and don't want to dig a deeper hole.

Thanks

This post has been edited by broodoo: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 10:57
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 8)
Advertisement
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 10:11
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 10:40
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



The first thing you do is edit that post so that the identity of the driver cannot be inferred. Use "the driver......" etc.

There is no such thing as a registered driver, only a registered keeper. Three legal entities: Registered keeper, keeper and driver.

What was the time difference, in days, between the driver parking and you, the keeper, receiving the Notice to Keeper? Both of them

Can you post up the Notice to Keeper suitably redacted of identifying details but leave dates.

Can you give a link to a google maps streetview of the location.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
broodoo
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 10:55
Post #3


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,420



The letters came in yesterday, and they were from 05/10 and 07/10.

The letters:
https://imgur.com/a/OHccDuU

Location:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Cannon+Wo...33;4d-0.0264291

Thanks for your help

This post has been edited by broodoo: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 13:02
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 11:28
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Take the letters down and repost with the Charge Norice number removed. A bit more details would be beneficial as I have difficulty reading the text.

There is a sign that says "Permit Holders Only" so they have not offered parking.

This post has been edited by ostell: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 11:31
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
broodoo
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 12:24
Post #5


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,420



QUOTE (ostell @ Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 12:28) *
Take the letters down and repost with the Charge Norice number removed. A bit more details would be beneficial as I have difficulty reading the text.

I'll transcribe the smaller text if that's the issue, but in summary it's claiming there was signage throughout the area on private land in which smart parking manages the parking. It also claims the driver did not possess the purchased parking time or remained longer than allowed.

"Smart parking Ltd have the right to seek payment of the parking charge for unauthorised parking of the vehicle on the land on the relevant date as the owner of the land on the basis of a contractual right to occupy or to have the possession of the land, or acting as the agent of the landowner.

A Parking Charge Notice (PCN) is payable with respect to the vehicle registration mark XXXX XXX or the alleged breach of advertised terms and conditions within CANNON WORKSHOPS, LONDON DOCKLANDS on XX/10/2018.

The signage, which is clearly displayed at the entrance to and throughout the car park, states that this is private land and the car park is managed by Smart Parking Ltd.

By either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at the car park for longer than permitted, in accordane with the terms and conditions set out in the signage, the Parking Charge is now payable to Smart Parking Ltd (as the creditor).

A Parking Charge Notice of £100.00 is now due for payment and must be paid before the end of the 28 days from with the date of this notice. If the parking charge notice is paid before 26 Oct 2018 the amount of the parking charge notice will be reduced to £60.00. If you were not the driver of the vehicle and you wish to provide the drivers details, lodge a dispute, appeal or query this must be made online or in writing. Please follow the instructions overleaf.

Following the landmark Supreme Court ruling of Parking Eye v Beavis, it has now been established that a parking charge notice issued on Private Land is enforceable. The Court rejected claims thatsuch changes are extravagant, exorbitant or unconscionable and advised that such charges act a neccesary deterrent for breach of contract. If you feel you have sufficient grounds to appeal this notice you will find full details of the appeals process overleaf."

QUOTE (ostell @ Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 12:28) *
There is a sign that says "Permit Holders Only" so they have not offered parking.

The bays immediately behind the sign were flagged with permit holder only notices along and down. The car was parked past the black gate through the arch.
Visible in this picture, where the man is standing.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Cannon+Wo...3;4d-0.0264291#

Inside this ground the bays were not marked as permit holder.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 21:26
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Smart Parking will fall over to the standard MSE appeal OR one stating they have failed to hold the Keeper liable.

Easy as pie. Use the MSE forum template (not any MSE article, only the parking forum).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 21:27
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Have a read of POFA, especially section 9. All of 9 (2) must be there to hold the keeper liable, and they are not. The warning at 9 (2) (f) is certainly not there.

If the signs are only saying "permit holders only" then they are not offering a contract to park and then cannot claim for a breach of the non existent contract. What they are claiming is a penalty, which is not allowed.

Edit:

Now that I'm back on my PC here's a letter to send

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to give notice of keeper liability as prescribed by section 9 (2) (f) of the Act. You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

The signage in the car park is of a “forbidding” nature. It is limited to cars displaying a valid permit only and therefore the terms cannot apply to cars without a permit because the signage does not offer an invitation to park on certain terms. The terms are forbidding. This means that there was never a contractual relationship. I refer you to the following case law: PCM-UK v Bull et all B4GF26K6 [2016], UKPC v Masterson B4GF26K6[2016], Horizon Parking v Mr J C5GF17X2 [2016] – In all three of these cases the signage was found to be forbidding and thus only a trespass had occurred and would be a matter for the landowner.

I do not expect to hear from you again, or you debt collectors, except to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc


This post has been edited by ostell: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 - 21:45
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
broodoo
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 10:59
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 16 Oct 2018
Member No.: 100,420



You absolute hero! I've had a read through POFA so have a better idea of what's going on now.

Thank you so much for your help ostell.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Wed, 17 Oct 2018 - 11:56
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Smart really are smart and cancel when they realise that they could be losing. You may get a refusal and a POPLA code but that appeal, as there is a POFA fail, should be successful
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 06:28
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here