PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN in post 7 days before 28 day date of notice, APCOA PCN Birmingham Airport
Nate G
post Thu, 18 May 2017 - 20:12
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 18 May 2017
Member No.: 92,055



Hi

Looking for some advice on this.

Seen a few post about PCN at Birmingham Airport but non are recent (seen posts from 2014) so not sure where I stand.

Received a PCN notice today in the post (18th May 2017) for a ALLEGED CONTRAVENTION OF DROPPING OFF OR PICKING UP OUTSIDE DESIGNATED AREAS.

The offence was 20/04/17 and the Issue of notice was 27/04/17, so I don't understand why I'm only receiving this notice now, with 7 days remaining to make a full payment (£100) and miss out on paying the reduced rate.

The letter is quite vague and I do not want to admit to anything as I don't want to implicate myself without having enough information.

Letter is attached, do I sit on my hands or do I appeal?

Thanks in advance
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Thu, 18 May 2017 - 20:12
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
hexaflexagon
post Thu, 18 May 2017 - 21:28
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 942
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
From: Oop t'north
Member No.: 76,816



Without revealing anything which could identify you what's the full text of the PCN? It looks like the bottom half has been blanked.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Thu, 18 May 2017 - 21:53
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



There are two common places outside the designated area where drivers drop off passengers

Both have poor signs

APCOA normally caves in at the second appeal at POPLA especially if you raise the issue that they've been misleading regarding the legislation that they used to issue the parking notice

Where railway and airport parking notices are involved, the tactic is always to make appeals as late as possible

The reason is that the notices are issued under byelaws or at least give that impression
Dragging the process out for six months takes them past the deadline for a prosecution
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nate G
post Fri, 19 May 2017 - 00:12
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 18 May 2017
Member No.: 92,055



Hexaflexagon - The Bottom have is blank, just the parts that are blacked out are the parts of the letter I edited

Gan - Thanks I'll try the appeal, just didn't like the fact that they sent the Notice so late and to be honest the letter looks suspicious.

Can only pay by post (Sheffield address) or over the phone, appeal by post or via email

reverse of letter attached
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 19 May 2017 - 06:25
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,635
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



OK, so they are not trying to rely on POFA to hold the keeper liable. Which is just as well as this must be subject to byelaws and therefore not relevant land and therefore no keeper liability.

You could write back to them, email as they give an address, as the keeper stating that you have passed the PCN on to the driver for action as requested but you will not be naming the driver as there is no legal reason to do so. Leave this to about day 26 of the 28 days allowed.

They could try and use the byelaws to chase you but those time out in 6 months so you could be in for a game of letter ping pong for those 6 months.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Fri, 19 May 2017 - 09:06
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,194
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



QUOTE (ostell @ Fri, 19 May 2017 - 07:25) *
OK, so they are not trying to rely on POFA to hold the keeper liable. Which is just as well as this must be subject to byelaws and therefore not relevant land and therefore no keeper liability.

You could write back to them, email as they give an address, as the keeper stating that you have passed the PCN on to the driver for action as requested but you will not be naming the driver as there is no legal reason to do so. Leave this to about day 26 of the 28 days allowed.

They could try and use the byelaws to chase you but those time out in 6 months so you could be in for a game of letter ping pong for those 6 months.

Or modify the airport template for VCS at JLA from my signate link.
The same situation applies exactly.
Ref PCN *******
You are well versed on the situation regarding the alleged contractual application of your perverse rules which seek to overrule the actual lawful airport byelaws.

I point you to your situation as it appears from my own perspective.

1. The airport is under bye-law control so taking action outwith the conditions imposed on airport matters is at the very least extremely questionable and more than likely completely unlawful, as in your company has no legal standing to impose quite separate sanctions on people. The Notice to Keeper supports that bye-laws are in operation by your use of the word "contravention".

2. Stopping on an airport road is not part of the bye-law conditions.

3. The scale of penalties under the byelaws is no way similar to those you seek to impose.

4. Your use of the words "Parking Charges" is extremely underhand and deliberately incorrect. Stopping is most definitely not parking as even an occasion where a driver has to stop to read the very signs you say impose contractual obligations on him to "not stop" would be a contravention, as would be stopping to allow a pedestrian to cross in front of him.

5. There is no reasonable assumption that a driver is also the registered keeper or vice versa so continued pursuit of the keeper without evidence to back up that assertion is wrongly founded. This is not saved by your example of Elliott v Loake where the police in a criminal case had forensic proof that the keeper was the driver. See case reference C8DP67P5 Bradford County Court, 14/10/2016

6. The signs you employ at the site have not been authorised under The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and do not meet a standard required for compliance to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directive where the signs are placed on a road accessible to the general public, so the continued use of them is an actually provable criminal offence.

7. It is clear that you are attempting to make a gain whilst carrying out an activity of a criminal nature so the law is able to prevent that under the terms of Ex_turpi_causa_non_oritur_actio, ie: The court will not assist a claimant to recover a benefit from his own wrongdoing.

8 (a). If any wrongdoing had occurred according to the wording on your signs, which one must stop on the roadside to read anyway, it would be doing something which you strictly cannot enforce under the law of contract so this would be a matter of trespass. You forbid stopping on the roadside and however you care to rephrase that, you cannot contract with a driver to do something you forbid.
(b). Trespass is only actionable by the landowner and as the vehicle was accessing the airport by invitation as part of the normal business of airport activity it cannot be seen clearly where a trespass can have taken place.

9 (a). Wrongful use of personal data. You have obtained the personal details of myself being the registered keeper of the said vehicle under the provisions of the KADOE agreement with the DVLA. There is no contract you allegedly hold with myself as the registered keeper so accessing my personal details was a breach of the Data Protection Act.
(b). If you rely on the alleged breach of the supposed contractual relationship, you have been mistaken in your assessment of the situation as a matter of trespass cannot afford you the same access to my details unless you are the landholder/owner or have some proprietary interest in the land. I assume, more strongly than your own assumptions, that Peel Holding, the airport owners have not given you proprietary interest so you cannot access details under the assumption of tort of trespass.

10. Now my final statement set out below:

Notice of claim before action

You have accessed the DVLA database to obtain my personal information when you had no legal right to do so.
This has caused me great deal of anxiety and stress

My details seem to be of no consequence to you, nor does the fact that you know, or should know that you have no rights to obtain and use my personal details.

At the commencement and subsequent renewal of any contract with the airport you should have had the situation looked at professionally by a legal expert who would have have told you what I have made clear above. Failure of that does not mean you have any excuse for not complying with the Data Protection Act. You failed in your due diligence of proper consideration of all aspects of the contract.

A breach of the Data Protection Act cannot be saved by lack of due consideration.
I remind you of your recent loss in court for VCS v Phillip, Claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016.
The judge found that a breach of the DPA had been occasioned. As is exactly the same as here, the signs placed at the Liverpool Business Park are the same as on the airport. It is quite evident that it would be impossible to form a contract with a motorist where nothing is offered. You cannot offer a driver the permission to stop where stopping is prohibited and there would be insufficient notification of the terms of the signs without stopping to read them in any case.

I now address the matter of damages for the unlawful acquisition and, passage of same to a third party debt collection agency.

I claim an amount of £750 from you payable within 14 days.
Failure to make such payment will result in legal action being commenced without further notification.


If you can't be arsed with a claim for a breach of the DPA just add instead that you now require them to remove your personal details under S10 of the DPA and inform you within 21 days that they have done that. If they fail you still have a claim for breach of the DPA.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hexaflexagon
post Fri, 19 May 2017 - 09:33
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 942
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
From: Oop t'north
Member No.: 76,816



QUOTE (Nate G @ Fri, 19 May 2017 - 01:12) *
Hexaflexagon - The Bottom have is blank, just the parts that are blacked out are the parts of the letter I edited

Gan - Thanks I'll try the appeal, just didn't like the fact that they sent the Notice so late and to be honest the letter looks suspicious.

Can only pay by post (Sheffield address) or over the phone, appeal by post or via email

reverse of letter attached


I asked since as shown the document, although it says it'a a PCN looks nothing like a PCN notice I've ever seen. Unless the stuff you've blanked out carries all the wording that a pukka PCN should contain.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nate G
post Fri, 19 May 2017 - 10:12
Post #8


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 18 May 2017
Member No.: 92,055



QUOTE (hexaflexagon @ Fri, 19 May 2017 - 10:33) *
QUOTE (Nate G @ Fri, 19 May 2017 - 01:12) *
Hexaflexagon - The Bottom have is blank, just the parts that are blacked out are the parts of the letter I edited

Gan - Thanks I'll try the appeal, just didn't like the fact that they sent the Notice so late and to be honest the letter looks suspicious.

Can only pay by post (Sheffield address) or over the phone, appeal by post or via email

reverse of letter attached


I asked since as shown the document, although it says it'a a PCN looks nothing like a PCN notice I've ever seen. Unless the stuff you've blanked out carries all the wording that a pukka PCN should contain.



I blacked out my address and registration #, everything else is as the letter was delivered

QUOTE (Lynnzer @ Fri, 19 May 2017 - 10:06) *
QUOTE (ostell @ Fri, 19 May 2017 - 07:25) *
OK, so they are not trying to rely on POFA to hold the keeper liable. Which is just as well as this must be subject to byelaws and therefore not relevant land and therefore no keeper liability.

You could write back to them, email as they give an address, as the keeper stating that you have passed the PCN on to the driver for action as requested but you will not be naming the driver as there is no legal reason to do so. Leave this to about day 26 of the 28 days allowed.

They could try and use the byelaws to chase you but those time out in 6 months so you could be in for a game of letter ping pong for those 6 months.

Or modify the airport template for VCS at JLA from my signate link.
The same situation applies exactly.
Ref PCN *******
You are well versed on the situation regarding the alleged contractual application of your perverse rules which seek to overrule the actual lawful airport byelaws.

I point you to your situation as it appears from my own perspective.

1. The airport is under bye-law control so taking action outwith the conditions imposed on airport matters is at the very least extremely questionable and more than likely completely unlawful, as in your company has no legal standing to impose quite separate sanctions on people. The Notice to Keeper supports that bye-laws are in operation by your use of the word "contravention".

2. Stopping on an airport road is not part of the bye-law conditions.

3. The scale of penalties under the byelaws is no way similar to those you seek to impose.

4. Your use of the words "Parking Charges" is extremely underhand and deliberately incorrect. Stopping is most definitely not parking as even an occasion where a driver has to stop to read the very signs you say impose contractual obligations on him to "not stop" would be a contravention, as would be stopping to allow a pedestrian to cross in front of him.

5. There is no reasonable assumption that a driver is also the registered keeper or vice versa so continued pursuit of the keeper without evidence to back up that assertion is wrongly founded. This is not saved by your example of Elliott v Loake where the police in a criminal case had forensic proof that the keeper was the driver. See case reference C8DP67P5 Bradford County Court, 14/10/2016

6. The signs you employ at the site have not been authorised under The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 and do not meet a standard required for compliance to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directive where the signs are placed on a road accessible to the general public, so the continued use of them is an actually provable criminal offence.

7. It is clear that you are attempting to make a gain whilst carrying out an activity of a criminal nature so the law is able to prevent that under the terms of Ex_turpi_causa_non_oritur_actio, ie: The court will not assist a claimant to recover a benefit from his own wrongdoing.

8 (a). If any wrongdoing had occurred according to the wording on your signs, which one must stop on the roadside to read anyway, it would be doing something which you strictly cannot enforce under the law of contract so this would be a matter of trespass. You forbid stopping on the roadside and however you care to rephrase that, you cannot contract with a driver to do something you forbid.
(b). Trespass is only actionable by the landowner and as the vehicle was accessing the airport by invitation as part of the normal business of airport activity it cannot be seen clearly where a trespass can have taken place.

9 (a). Wrongful use of personal data. You have obtained the personal details of myself being the registered keeper of the said vehicle under the provisions of the KADOE agreement with the DVLA. There is no contract you allegedly hold with myself as the registered keeper so accessing my personal details was a breach of the Data Protection Act.
(b). If you rely on the alleged breach of the supposed contractual relationship, you have been mistaken in your assessment of the situation as a matter of trespass cannot afford you the same access to my details unless you are the landholder/owner or have some proprietary interest in the land. I assume, more strongly than your own assumptions, that Peel Holding, the airport owners have not given you proprietary interest so you cannot access details under the assumption of tort of trespass.

10. Now my final statement set out below:

Notice of claim before action

You have accessed the DVLA database to obtain my personal information when you had no legal right to do so.
This has caused me great deal of anxiety and stress

My details seem to be of no consequence to you, nor does the fact that you know, or should know that you have no rights to obtain and use my personal details.

At the commencement and subsequent renewal of any contract with the airport you should have had the situation looked at professionally by a legal expert who would have have told you what I have made clear above. Failure of that does not mean you have any excuse for not complying with the Data Protection Act. You failed in your due diligence of proper consideration of all aspects of the contract.

A breach of the Data Protection Act cannot be saved by lack of due consideration.
I remind you of your recent loss in court for VCS v Phillip, Claim number C9DP2D6C Liverpool 07/12/2016.
The judge found that a breach of the DPA had been occasioned. As is exactly the same as here, the signs placed at the Liverpool Business Park are the same as on the airport. It is quite evident that it would be impossible to form a contract with a motorist where nothing is offered. You cannot offer a driver the permission to stop where stopping is prohibited and there would be insufficient notification of the terms of the signs without stopping to read them in any case.

I now address the matter of damages for the unlawful acquisition and, passage of same to a third party debt collection agency.

I claim an amount of £750 from you payable within 14 days.
Failure to make such payment will result in legal action being commenced without further notification.


If you can't be arsed with a claim for a breach of the DPA just add instead that you now require them to remove your personal details under S10 of the DPA and inform you within 21 days that they have done that. If they fail you still have a claim for breach of the DPA.



Much Appreciated Lynnzer

QUOTE (ostell @ Fri, 19 May 2017 - 07:25) *
OK, so they are not trying to rely on POFA to hold the keeper liable. Which is just as well as this must be subject to byelaws and therefore not relevant land and therefore no keeper liability.

You could write back to them, email as they give an address, as the keeper stating that you have passed the PCN on to the driver for action as requested but you will not be naming the driver as there is no legal reason to do so. Leave this to about day 26 of the 28 days allowed.

They could try and use the byelaws to chase you but those time out in 6 months so you could be in for a game of letter ping pong for those 6 months.



Thanks Ostell
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Fri, 19 May 2017 - 21:29
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,903
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



The signs at BHX are 'interesting' as they can not in any way be said to create a contract with ACPOA as ACPOA's name isn't even on the signs.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gan
post Fri, 19 May 2017 - 23:18
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 22,678
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Member No.: 27,239



If this is where I think, you're right

The signs on the road don't mention APCOA

There are two favourite drop-off points that feature here - by the zebra crossings with the railings or the Ibis Hotel layby.

Both have APCOA signs nearby but not where they would be seen

The sign by the railings is on a pole at the back of wide pavement
You could be forgiven for thinking it's in the car park and turned round

The sign by the hotel is at the very far end of the layby
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 20 May 2017 - 05:06
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,903
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



The 'entry' no stopping signage is just after the hire car entrance and makes no mention of APCOA. So it fails the 'effectively binding' CoP test on signage handsomely. While better than LJLA it's still too small and too much to read while driving past.



This post has been edited by The Rookie: Sat, 20 May 2017 - 05:11


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lynnzer
post Sat, 20 May 2017 - 06:55
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,194
Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Member No.: 4,813



Apart from the obvious byelaw situation, this isn't a case of "parking" as would fall under PoFA for keeper liability. In fact it's more a police matter for a contravention of the RTA, if anything.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Point-On
post Sun, 14 Jan 2018 - 22:21
Post #13


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 14 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,970



Hi All

A started this thread, but seemed to have lost my original login info.

I told the advice you gave (appeal process) emailing Birmingham Appeals on 24/05/2017.

I have been sent a new Reminder Letter from APCOA dated 04/01/18 of the said offence with photographic evidence.

Fine is £100, is their any steps I can take to resolve this?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sun, 14 Jan 2018 - 22:30
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,635
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Just continue to ignore, you've already responded to them. They're just seeing if you'll chicken out.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Point-On
post Sun, 14 Jan 2018 - 23:12
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 14 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,970



QUOTE (ostell @ Sun, 14 Jan 2018 - 22:30) *
Just continue to ignore, you've already responded to them. They're just seeing if you'll chicken out.

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
I am Weasel
post Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 08:08
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,332
Joined: 15 Apr 2009
From: Winnersh, UK
Member No.: 27,840



I might be tempted to go on the offensive for this one and make a claim under the Data Protection Act. It is well over 6 months since the original alleged contravention and therefore too late to bring the matter before a Magistrates court. It follows that APCOA now have no reasonable cause to continue holding or processing your data.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Point-On
post Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 22:37
Post #17


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 14 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,970



QUOTE (I am Weasel @ Mon, 15 Jan 2018 - 08:08) *
I might be tempted to go on the offensive for this one and make a claim under the Data Protection Act. It is well over 6 months since the original alleged contravention and therefore too late to bring the matter before a Magistrates court. It follows that APCOA now have no reasonable cause to continue holding or processing your data.


I might look into that
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 16 Jan 2018 - 11:34
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,385
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



DPA PLUS harassment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Point-On
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 21:57
Post #19


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 14 Jan 2018
Member No.: 95,970



Hi All

The saga continues.......

Received a notice from DRP (Debt Recovery Plus Ltd) with a charge of £150.00. It seems the fine has been forwarded to them for collection.

What should be my next move?

I have until 31/05/2018 to settle the matter.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sun, 20 May 2018 - 22:11
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,635
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



As is normal with DRP ignore but file. Eventually you will get a Zenith letter. Zenith is the next desk in the DRP office. Ignore as well
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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: Monday, 12th November 2018 - 23:21
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.