PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Premier Parking, Appeals to POPLA
SilverMitsubishi
post Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 10:42
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 6 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,257



Hi Guys

I have received a PCN and I am appealing the ticket.

below are the appeals emails I have written the 1st one is a copy of my online appeal I filled in. Which is the standard letter from this Forum.

Dear Sir,

Formal Dispute - Parking Charge Notice XXXXXXX: Vehicle Registration XXXX XXX

I refer to the above-detailed Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) issued to me by Premier Park Ltd (“Premier”) as a Notice to Keeper. I confirm that I am the keeper of this vehicle for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

(“POFA”) and I write to formally dispute the validity of this PCN.

You will no doubt be familiar with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of POFA to be followed in order for a parking operator to be able to claim unpaid parking charges from a vehicle’s keeper. However, there are a number of reasons why Premier’s Notice to Keeper did not comply with POFA; in order that you may understand why, I suggest that you carefully study the details of Schedule 4, Paragraph 9 in particular.

Premier has now forfeited its right to claim keeper liability. Therefore please confirm that you shall now cancel this charge or alternatively, should you still believe that you have a valid claim, please provide me with details of the Independent Appeals Service (POPLA), their contact details and a unique POPLA appeal reference so that I may escalate this dispute to POPLA.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.


The one that follows is their reply to my appeal.

Dear Mr XXXXXX

Thank you for your appeal, on behalf of the driver, against the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN). We have carefully considered your appeal, however on this occasion the appeal has been rejected for the following reason;

The vehicle overstayed the paid parking period by 23 minutes

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and therefore you now have two options;

You can pay the total amount due as shown above via the following payment options;

Call us on: 01302 513232
Pay online: www.pcnpayments.com
Send a postal order: Premier Park Ltd, PO Box 624, Exeter, EX1 9JG

You can appeal to an Independent Appeals Service, POPLA (Parking on Private Land Appeals) using the POPLA reference code provided above. Please note, should you decide to appeal to POPLA and your appeal is subsequently rejected or you withdraw your appeal, the option to pay a discounted amount will no longer be available and the full amount of the PCN will become due.

If you decide to appeal to POPLA, you will need to visit their website, www.popla.co.uk where further details of how to appeal (either online or by downloading the relevant forms) can be found. If you are unable to access their website, please call us for further information on how to obtain the forms. Please ensure your POPLA Reference Number, as noted above, is quoted on all correspondence to POPLA. You have 28 days from the date of this letter to submit an appeal to POPLA. If you appeal to POPLA we will suspend recovery activity on the PCN and the charge will not increase until the appeal has been determined.

By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services. org/) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.

If you do not make payment or submit an appeal to POPLA within the relevant timeframe, the outstanding PCN may be passed to our appointed debt collection agency for further action. All costs associated with this process will be added to the amount outstanding.


My question is where do I go next - I take it I need a letter to POPLA or do I ask Premier to provide images of the Parking signs and their positions.

Any help would be gratefully appreciated

SilverMitsubishi
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 10:42
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 11:18
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



You'll be writing an appeal to POPLA
Plenty of examples on here to crib from.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 18:14
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,812
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Although getting old now, my wins against CEL Hedge End, Met McD Gatwick and ECP Shell Gatwick will give you an idea of what you need to think about AND understand.

Draft your POPLA appeal and post it here for critique.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Mon, 20 Aug 2018 - 21:51
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Don't expect PP to help you. Get your own images and post them on here. PP will supply images of signs etc to POPLA after you have submitted your evidence. It will then be too late to submit new arguments to POPLA.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SilverMitsubishi
post Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 11:52
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 6 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,257



I cannot get my own photographs due to living at the other side of the country from the car park which the PCN was received.

The signs are not legible on Google maps.



This post has been edited by SilverMitsubishi: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 12:34
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 11:59
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,157
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



QUOTE (SilverMitsubishi @ Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 12:52) *
I cannot get my own photographs due to living at the other side of the country from the car park which the PCN was received.


Google Maps perhaps, then street view. https://www.google.co.uk/maps
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SilverMitsubishi
post Thu, 23 Aug 2018 - 12:42
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 6 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,257



The carpark is in Infracombe and the signs are not clearly visible on Google Maps/Street View.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SilverMitsubishi
post Tue, 28 Aug 2018 - 11:29
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 6 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,257



Here is my POPLA appeal for you guys to critique.

Any pointers greatly received.


Vehicle Registration Number xxxxxxxx
PCN Reference xxxxxxxxxxx
Issued by Premier Park Limited (PPL)

As the registered keeper of the above vehicle, I wish to appeal the parking charge notice you issued against it. I would like to have the parking charge notice cancelled based on the following grounds:

1) No keeper liability
2) BPA Code of Practice - non-compliance to guidelines
3) No evidence of period parked
4) No landowner authority
5) Lack of signage- unclear signage
6) The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate

1) No keeper liability
The driver of the vehicle has not been identified. In order for the operator to transfer liability for the charge from the driver of the vehicle to the registered keeper, they must with the strict requirements set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). This too was confirmed by Mr Greenslade, POPLA Lead Adjudicator. in page 8 of the 2015 POPLA Report:

''If POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is not complied with then keeper liability does not generally pass.''

2) BPA Code of Practice - non-compliance to guidelines:
The BPA Code of Practice point 20.5a stipulates that: "When issuing a parking charge notice you may use photographs as evidence that a vehicle was parked in an unauthorised way. The photographs must refer to and confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised. A date and time stamp should be included on the photograph. All photographs used for evidence should be clear and legible and must not be retouched or digitally altered."

The parking charge notice in question contains two photographs of the vehicle number plate. They do they clearly show the vehicle entering or leaving the car park as required in the BPA Code of practice. The images may have also been cropped and I invite PPL to produce evidence of the original "un-cropped" images showing the vehicle entering and leaving the car park.

3) No evidence of period parked.
The NtK clearly states the vehicle was parked during the relevant period. PoFA2012 Sched 4 Para 9 refers at numerous times to the period of parking. By virtue of the nature of a ANPR system recording only entry and exit times, PPL are not able to definitively state the period of parking. Contrary to the mandatory provisions of the BPA code of practice, there is no record to show that the vehicle was parked longer than the time allowed PLUS the mandatory grace periods. These are a minimum of 10 minutes to leave the car park and a similar period to cover the period after the vehicle parks, finds signage, reads the signage and decides whether to accept or reject the terms offered within. An alleged 23 minutes overstay does not meet the binding code of practice. There is no evidence that the vehicle was ‘parked’ for 3 hours 23 minutes.

4)No landowner Authority:

I question Premier Parks Ltd’s authority from the landowner, to enforce parking charges regarding alleged breaches at this car park.

BPA CoP paragraphs 7.1 & 7.2 dictate some of the required contract wording. I put PPL to strict proof of the contract terms with the actual landowner (not a lessee or agent who has no more title than the operator). I question PPL’s legal status to enforce this charge because there is no assignment of rights to pursue PCNs in the courts in neither their own name nor standing to form contracts with drivers themselves.

They do not own this car park and appear (at best) to have a bare licence to put signs up and ‘ticket’ vehicles on site, merely acting as agents on behalf of a principal. No evidence has been supplied lawfully showing that PPL is entitled to pursue these charges in their own right in the courts which is a strict requirement within the BPA CoP. I suggest that PPL are certainly not empowered by the landowner to sue customers and visitors in a free of charge car park and that issuing 'PCNs' by post is no evidence of any right to actually pursue charges in court.

In addition, Section 7.3 of the CoP states:

“The written authorisation must also set out:

a) the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined
b) Any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation
c) Any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement
d) Who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs
e) The definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.''

I put PPL to strict proof of compliance with all of the above requirements.

This is vital; I contend that the contract - if this operator produces one - does not reflect the signage and if only a basic agreement or 'witness statement' is produced, then this will fail to demonstrate compliance with 7.3 (in particular, point b and d, above).

This would destroy any attempt by this operator to argue there is a Beavis-case-style 'legitimate interest' backed by any commercial justification and wishes of the landowner to sue customers after just 2 hours in a car park.
I require PPL to provide a full copy of the contemporaneous, signed & dated contract with the landowner showing evidence to meet 7.3 of the CoP. In order to comply, a non-landowner private parking company must have a specifically-worded contract with the landowner – not merely an ‘agreement’ with a non-landholder managing agent – otherwise there is no authority.

5) Lack of signage - unclear signage – no contract with driver - no adequate notice of the charge, maximum stay nor grace period.

The entrance signage was not suitably placed to be read from a distance for a driver in an approaching car whilst manoeuvring into the car park from Ropery Road and many of the words are in a small font and are not legible or intelligible.

The BPA Code of Practice states that- “You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm. “

There were no conspicuous signs throughout the site. I put PPL to strict proof on this point. As well as a site map they must show photographs of the signs as the driver would seem them on entering the car park bearing in mind that they may be completely unfamiliar with the area, the approach to the car park, the entrance to the car park, or the layout of the car park. A Notice is not imported into the contract unless brought home so prominently that the party ‘must’ have known of it and agreed terms. If the driver did not notice any signs; there was no consideration/acceptance and no contract agreed between the parties. Furthermore, as stated, a suitable grace period must be allowed for the driver to find a suitable parking space, find the signs containing the parking terms, (should they be easily located), decide whether to accept these terms and leave the car park in a safe manner.

Furthermore the driver has not been identified and I have no obligation to assist an operator in this regard, even if I was certain which of several drivers could have used the car that day. As liability for this charge depends entirely upon this operator fulfilling all requirements of Schedule 4, it is mandatory that the driver(s) are unambiguously and clearly informed of terms and the parking charge itself:

(3) ''For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) “adequate notice” means notice given by — (b)...the display of one or more notices which—

(i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and

(ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park vehicles on the relevant land.''

In fact, their signs are not visible from a car seat before parking and the words are completely unreadable and incapable of forming a contract before the act of parking (it is trite law that afterwards - after parking in this case - is too late).

The sign also breaches the BPA CoP Appendix B which effectively renders it unable to form a contract with a driver.

In the Beavis case, the Supreme Court Judge concluded that signs must be in 'large lettering and prominent' and very clear as to the terms by which a driver will later be bound.

6) The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate.
The PPL evidence shows no parking time, merely two images of a number plate corresponding with that of the vehicle in question. There is no connection demonstrated whatsoever with the car park in question.

In any case it is unreasonable for this operator to record the start of 'parking time' as the moment of arrival in moving traffic if they in fact offer a pay and display system which the driver can only access after parking and which is when the actual action and period of parking commences, when the vehicle is stationary, and when the clock should start from. The exit photo image of the rear number plate cannot be evidence of actual 'parking time' at all, and has not been shown to relate to the same parking event.

Additionally you cannot discount that the driver may have driven in and out on two separate occasions both within the allowable grace period. The BPA even mention this as an inherent problem with ANPR on their website; www.britishparking.co.uk/How-does-ANPR- work

The BPA's view is: 'As with all new technology, there are issues associated with its use. Some ‘drive in/drive out’ motorists that have activated the system receive a charge certificate even though they have not parked or taken a ticket. Reputable operators tend not to uphold charge certificates issued in this manner...'

Additionally under paragraph 21.3 of the BPA Code of Practice, parking companies are required to ensure ANPR equipment is maintained and is in correct working order. I require PPL to provide records with the location of the cameras used in this instance, together dates and times of when the equipment was checked, calibrated, maintained and synchronised with the timer which stamps the photo images to ensure the accuracy of the ANPR images. As the parking charge is founded entirely on 2 photos of the vehicle number plate allegedly entering and leaving the car park at specific times (not shown within the photographic images), it is vital that PPL produces evidence in response to these points.

In addition to showing their maintenance records, I require PPL to show evidence to rebut the following assertion. I suggest that in the case of this vehicle being in that car park, a local camera took the image but a remote server added the time stamps. As the two are disconnected by the internet and do not have a common "time synchronisation system", there is no proof that the time stamp added is actually the exact time of the image. The Operator appears to use WIFI which introduces a delay through buffering, so "live" is not really "live". Hence, without a synchronised time stamp, there is no evidence that the image is ever time stamped with an accurate time. Therefore I contend that this ANPR evidence from the cameras in this car park is just as unreliable and unsynchronised as the evidence put forward in the recent case of ParkingEye v Fox-Jones on 8 Nov 2013. That case was dismissed when the judge deemed the evidence from ParkingEye to be fundamentally flawed because the synchronisation of the camera pictures with the timer had been called into question and the operator could not rebut the point. As its whole charge rests upon two timed photo images, I put PPL to strict proof to the contrary.

I respectfully request that this parking charge notice appeal be allowed and await your decision.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Tue, 28 Aug 2018 - 13:17
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Your point 1) is potentially the clincher. However you should spell out clearly how they have not complied with POFA. Don't leave it to the POPLA assessor to work it out for himself.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Glacier2
post Wed, 29 Aug 2018 - 18:51
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9,686
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 1,131



Unless you flesh out in great detail why there is no compliance you will lose. The assessor will not help you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Onetap
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 14:22
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21
Joined: 31 Aug 2010
Member No.: 40,176



http://www.ilfracombetowncouncil.gov.uk/co...opery-car-park/

Signs shown here.

Owned by Town Council, managed by Premier Park.




http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showto...8&st=0&

Is this still applicable?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 14:31
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,880
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



I would assert as the first point that there's a parking place order and the location isn't relevant land
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 14:53
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Yes it is still applicable. You now have two very good reasons why they cannot hold the RK liable. When are you going to update your POPLA appeal draft with these key points? Your current draft is too long winded and does not provide this compelling evidence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 19:49
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,812
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



The POPLA appeal is the perfect length, having produced 10 wins for me, to date. It is necessary to put the PPC to a LOT of work to rebut every point. It increases the likelihood that they will decline to contest.

However, the PPO and, therefore, not relevant land should be the first point that is made, very clearly. Then, if it gets as far as POPLA, the adjudicator gets a chance to kick it into touch straightaway.

This post has been edited by cabbyman: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 - 19:51


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Tue, 4 Sep 2018 - 08:25
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



You have some compelling evidence so don't hide it in a long winded submission. Make it compelling and convincing to read and put it up front! It is compelling evidence that gives you the best chance of success.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SilverMitsubishi
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 11:57
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 6 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,257



Hi Guys

Thanks for the information.

Unfortunately I sent my POPLA appeal off before i got your comments on the 3rd. - the deadline was due.

Premier Parking have uploaded their evidence to the POPLA portal.

What is my next stage?

Can I include the information about the Council owned land and PPO - not relevant land and the no proof of parking as it should still be applicable to the PoFA2012 Sched 4 Para 3 and PoFA2012 Sched 4 Para 9.

There is a space at the bottom for a 2000 reply.

Something along the lines of -


The land to which you refer (Ropery Car Park) is not ‘relevant land’ as per Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 Paragraph 3 as the land is owned by Ilfracombe Town Council and managed by Premier Park Ltd.

The council are not allowed to employ a private firm to manage their land, look up what happened in relation to Wycombe District Council when they were banned from accessing the DVLA information.

In addition, even if the NTK/PCN was correct (which it isn’t), the only evidence you have provided is a vehicle entering and leaving the land on an ANPR camera, it does not show the vehicle parked at all, it just shows it moving in front of a camera.

I believe that data in relation to the vehicle has been illegally acquired via the DVLA as Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 does not apply.


I have 7 days from the 11th Sept to provide comments on the evidence uploaded by Premier Park.

Cheers

SivlerMitsubishi
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 12:30
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Unfortunately you can't submit any new evidence. If you do it will be ignored. You can only comment on the operator's evidence.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 12:36
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,812
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



Show us PP's evidence.


--------------------
Cabbyman 10 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SilverMitsubishi
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 12:49
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 6 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,257



This is their evidence - sorry it so long

I have pdf showing signs etc.

Will i need to take out my personal information on the pdf or can i just upload as they are?

Operator Information and Evidence
Submitted 11/09/2018
Verification Code
**********)
Operator Name
Premier Park
Operator Case Summary
We have placed a number of signs around the location which have been approved by the BPA Auditing Team. Our signs follow a tried and tested method to grab the attention of all motorists entering the location. Our signs outline the terms and conditions so a motorist is able to decide whether they wish to stay or remain and abide by the terms. By designing our signs in the way that we have we believe that we are fully compliant with the BPA Code of Practice and have brought the issue of a PCN, and its amount, to the adequate attention of the motorist. Our signs are readable and understandable at all times, including during the hours of darkness or at dusk. There is no direct lighting but the parking area is lit from surrounding businesses and street lighting. The vehicle’s headlights would have lit up the signage and the car park also. When entering the car park, the vehicle headlights would have lit the entrance and exit signs Signs – according to British Parking Association Code of Practice 18.2 Entrance signs play an important part in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore, as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of. Entrance signs must follow some minimum general principles and be in a standard format. The size of the sign must take into account the expected speed of vehicles approaching the car park, and it is recommended that you follow Department for Transport guidance on this. See Appendix B for an example of an entrance sign and more information about their use. The sign at the entrance does meet all of the BPAs guidance. The motorist would not be doing 30mph at this point as there is an approach and the motorist is not directly entering the car park from the road. 18.3 Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm There are sufficient signs around the site, as you can see in our photographic evidence. These advise the motorists of the terms and conditions of the site clearly. We enclose copies of the signage at this site. The Appellant has not denied seeing said signage. The signage states: Please Pay for Your Stay • Please enter the full, correct vehicle registration details at the payment terminal, of the vehicle you are parking. • Summer Charges- 15th March to 31st October- evening/overnight 18:00 to 08:00 • Winter Charges 1st November to 14th March- 08:00 to 18:00 • All permit holders must have their vehicle pre-registered before using the car park • Park only within marked bays • No stopping or waiting. If you cannot pay for any reason do not park • Blue badge concessions do not apply • Ilfracombe Town Council is not involved in the parking management of this car park & cannot intervene in any disputes. • Camera enforcement in operation. Images captured are used for parking enforcement purposes. • Parking period commences 5 minutes after entry. Motorists are required to enter the full and correct vehicle registration – validate what has been entered – then proceed with payment. If you enter or park on this land contravening the terms and conditions, you are agreeing to pay a £100 Parking Charge Notice (PCN). The Appellants vehicle entered the site at 11:35 and exited at 14:59. We can confirm that a 3-hour parking session was purchased at 11:37. This parking session expired at 14:37 and the Appellant exited the site at 14:59, 22 minutes after it expired. There is no record of a permit for this vehicle registration. See ‘Other Evidence’. The Appellant states “As the registered keeper of the above vehicle, I wish to appeal the parking charge notice you issued against it. I would like to have the parking charge notice cancelled based on the following grounds: 1) PPL failed to deliver a Notice to Keeper in compliance with the requirements of POFA. 2) BPA Code of Practice - non-compliance to guidelines 3) No evidence of period parked 4) No landowner authority 5) Lack of signage - unclear signage 6) The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate See attached appeal letter”. This car park is monitored by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras which take a time and date stamped image of the vehicle on entry and exit, measuring the length of time the vehicle remained on site. This is then cross-referenced with the data from the payment machines, pay by phone service and virtual permit system. The main requirements for parking on site are that the full, correct vehicle registration is entered when purchasing a parking session, or being registered on the permit system, and that the full duration of the stay is covered by either the payment or permit. The Appellant failed to comply with the terms and conditions, on this occasion. Due to the use of ANPR cameras, there is no requirement for us to provide evidence of the vehicle parked on site, as we have the photographic evidence of the entry and exit times, thus proving the period of time the vehicle remained on site. The Appellant has not disputed the entry or exit times, so has not denied that the vehicle remained on site for 3 hours and 23 minutes. The signage clearly states ‘Parking period commences 5 minutes after entry’. We are unsure why the driver would be unaware of the parking period, especially as they made a payment 2 minutes after entry, and therefore, had accepted the contract. The Appellant has not denied that the driver saw the signage, we cannot be held liable for the driver failing to see, or ignoring, the signage. The Appellant has not provided any evidence to prove that the driver was authorised to park on site for 3 hours and 23 minutes whilst only purchasing a parking session for 3 hours. The Appellant has not provided any reason for the driver overstaying the paid parking session. We would advise that the driver could have topped up, or extended their parking session via the payment machines or the pay by phone service, RingGo, at any point. The details are clearly displayed on the signage. We cannot be held liable for the driver failing to pay for the full duration of the stay. If the driver was unsure ant any point they could have called us, our telephone number is displayed on the signs. We can confirm we did not receive any calls from the Appellant on the date of the contravention. The Appellant has alleged that the ‘ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate’ but has failed to provide any evidence to support this. We have enclosed evidence from our ANPR Capture Events system to show that there are only 2 captured reads for the Appellants vehicle on the date of the contravention. The Appellant has not, at any point, stated that the driver left and re-entered the site as part of their appeal and we have enclosed evidence to prove that this did not happen. Please see ‘Other Evidence’. When entering onto a managed private car park, a motorist might enter into a contract by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage at the site sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. Therefore, upon entry to the car park, the driver should have reviewed the terms and conditions before deciding to park. 13 Grace periods – according to the British Parking Association Code of Practice 13.1 If a driver is parking without your permission, or at locations where parking is not normally permitted they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract. 13.2 If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes. The Appellant entered the car park at 11:35 and purchased a 3-hour ticket at 11:37, 2 minutes after entering. The Appellant’s ticket expired at 14:37 but the Appellant did not exit the car park until 14:59, 22 minutes afterwards. As per the BPA Code of Practice we allow motorists 10 minutes to exit the car park before a PCN is issued. Taking these grace periods into consideration the Appellant remained on site for 23 minutes unpaid. If the driver felt, for any reason, that they were not able to adhere to the terms and conditions, then they would have had sufficient opportunity to choose not to park and depart the site. Ultimately, the motorist failed to keep to the conditions of the contract formed. The Appellant’s vehicle was parked for 3 hours and 23 minutes with payment only made for 3 hours. Therefore, the whole period of parking was not paid for and a Parking Charge Notice was issued. It is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that they have read and parked in compliance with the terms and conditions. On this occasion, the Appellant did not. We request that the Appellant's appeal be refused.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SilverMitsubishi
post Wed, 12 Sep 2018 - 15:08
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 6 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,257



I have attached the redacted contract between the council and PPL.

Am i right in saying that if it is a legal contract that it needs signing by witnesses?
Attached File(s)
Attached File  Evidence_Contract.pdf ( 599.95K ) Number of downloads: 11
 
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, 24th September 2018 - 06:46
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.