PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

NPE - ticket even after parking within rules
AlCapwn
post Sat, 28 May 2022 - 22:47
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



Hello

NPE have issued an invoice stating "vehicle not registered on permit database". However, the car was parking in a disabled bay, displaying a blue badge for the entire parking period and driver was visiting an onsite resident as required by their T&Cs. There is no applicable requirement to register on a permit database.

The badge was displayed on the passenger side and obscured by another car so it is not visible in zoomed in cctv images. The signage makes no mention of where to put the badge so it can be seen from a camera (located 1pm from car). They have parked there before without any issues.

In addition to simply laying out the facts that the badge was on display the entire time and sending a picture of the badge, is there anything else I should add? I suspect they will ignore it as usual so want to cover all potential bases.













This post has been edited by AlCapwn: Sat, 28 May 2022 - 22:48
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 18)
Advertisement
post Sat, 28 May 2022 - 22:47
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sun, 29 May 2022 - 04:38
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,200
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



“Vehicles must have an e-permit”, it’s there as clear as day, there are then additional requirements such as having a BB in a disabled bay (which cannot, legally, be a requirement but I digress). That’s why you have been sent the charge notice.


--------------------
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 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TMC Towcester
post Sun, 29 May 2022 - 06:52
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,074
Joined: 17 Nov 2015
Member No.: 80,686



It doesn't say that?

The word 'all' is missing and I'd interpret that as having separate terms for disabled badge owners? Am I missing the 'how to get an e-permit' part too?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Sun, 29 May 2022 - 07:28
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



An e-permit is for allocated parking, this is visitor parking where badge holders are exempt from paying. Just to be sure, I went to bay4pay.co.uk and no option to register for disabled visitor parking exists.

An e-permit is a manual process where a resident submits documentation for their car and is allocated a numbered bay for their sole use if one is available. VRMs allowed to park there are then pre-registered with the permit team.

They parked there previously with no issue.

This post has been edited by AlCapwn: Sun, 29 May 2022 - 07:39
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dudesmurf
post Sun, 29 May 2022 - 07:46
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 57
Joined: 1 May 2022
Member No.: 116,460



If I was reading those notices for the first time on site my understanding would be that there are permit only and visitor spaces. The visitor spaces are marked with a V and are pay on arrival or free to blue badge holders. The disabled spaces do not have a V and so are for disabled permit holders. As a visitor you'd only be entitled to free parking in a bay marked with a V whilst displaying the blue badge.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Mon, 30 May 2022 - 19:28
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



I walked around the estate today, all the bays have a bay number or Visitor bay number. This bay is the odd one out, just says Disabled.

Is there any defence here? Or suck it up and take it as a learning experience?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Tue, 31 May 2022 - 08:47
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



Well I emailed NPE and they said this is free for blue badge holders. Unfortunately blue badge was obscured by another car and not visible on cctv
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 31 May 2022 - 08:51
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,200
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



I doubt they use CCTV to monitor for a BB, more likely a warden.

They are often incentivised on tickets and thus will take photo's from imaginative angles to justify the issue.


--------------------
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 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Tue, 31 May 2022 - 09:00
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



They don't use wardens at all, it's all cctv now. They did zoom in on the dash but the badge was not visible from that angle. Very annoying!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 31 May 2022 - 09:02
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,200
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



In which case once you show that the BB was displayed and it was their error in failing to see it you have a GDPR complaint as they no longer have a reasonable cause for continuing to process your data.

You can show this with a video showing the badge displayed and then moving to the same view as the CCTV and it disappearing.


--------------------
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 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Tue, 31 May 2022 - 09:37
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



Thanks, I'll make a video showing that. Is there any case precedent you're aware of?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 31 May 2022 - 09:39
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



In parking cases there is essentially no real precedent bar PE v Beavis. So no. But you don't need it. You re just showing that on the balance of probabilities the badge was on display. The video does one part, and your witness testimony the other.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DWMB2
post Tue, 31 May 2022 - 09:49
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,363
Joined: 9 Apr 2021
Member No.: 112,205



Most parking cases don't go beyond the County Court small claims track, which doesn't create precedent. But as said, all you essentially need to do is successfully swing the balance of probabilities in your favour.

At the moment the evidence is their CCTV with no badge visible. Your video, and testimony that one was on display will hopefully help to demonstrate that a badge was visible, and they failed to spot it, due to their enforcement system not being fit for purpose.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Sun, 5 Jun 2022 - 00:15
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



Can I get some feedback on this response please

QUOTE
To whom it may concern,
I write to you as keeper of vehicle XXXXX.
I deny your claim I am liable for any charge due to the following:

1) The car was parked in accordance with the terms and conditions.
The parking terms and conditions require a blue badge to be on display while parked and parking should be to visit an onsite resident. Both of these conditions were met. The blue badge was put on the dashboard on the passenger side but the view was obscured to the camera by another car parked in front.

2) NPE have implemented a CCTV system which:
a. Is deficient
b. Is not fit for purpose

NPE’s CCTV system does not allow them to view the entire dashboard of the car for a disabled badge when parked in a disabled bay if another car is parked in front. It is not the fault of the keeper or driver that NPE have implemented a deficient system which does not allow them to check if the driver has parked in a compliant manner.

If parking was checked by a warden, they would have found the blue badge on display.

From the photos provided, it is clear NPE have relied solely on CCTV and have only been able to check the driver’s side of the dashboard. The error is on NPE’s part for implementing a system which is not fit for purpose.

I refer you to IPC Code of Practice section 14.5:

“Where CCTV and/or ANPR technology is used appropriate checks must be carried out to ensure Parking Charges are only issued where there is Reasonable Cause to believe a Parking Charge is due before issuing a Postal Notification.”

As NPE’s deficient CCTV system cannot check if a badge is on display, you could not have had ‘Reasonable Cause to believe a Parking Charge is due’ and have failed to adhere to this requirement. I will be complaining to the IPC about this behaviour.

In support of the above, I have attached a video showing how if NPE’s system was fit for purpose and able to check the dashboard, it would have seen the disabled badge. I have also attached pictures of the same.


RE complaining to IPC, I previously complained about NPE's debt collector agent using misleading language and they said they will not use that wording again. So I fully intend to complain to them again about NPE using a system with crappy coverage.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hcandersen
post Sun, 5 Jun 2022 - 11:29
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 35,065
Joined: 2 Aug 2008
From: Woking
Member No.: 21,551



Piecing this together:

the car was parking in a disabled bay

This cannot be seen from the photos embedded in the PCN, so we're left to accept the OP's statement.

Therefore, any matters regarding conditions attaching to 'V' or 'Visitors' bays do not apply, IMO. However, conditions attaching to 'Visitor Parking' do and the sign headed as such states:

'Blue badge holders parking in a visitor bay are exempt from paying whilst clearly displaying a valid Blue Badge and visiting an onsite resident'.

IMO, it would be a nonsense to then suggest that BB holders parking in a disabled bay would be liable to payment, whereas parking is free in a visitor bay.

IMO, the signs in combination mean that BB holders alone may use visitor bays or disabled bays and that payment is not required in either case.

IMO, the PPC is being idle and acting contrary to the spirit if not the content of the BPA CoP by looking to monitor use by camera because whereas these can compare VRMs against payments/permits held, they cannot identify valid BBs. The PCN could therefore be nothing more than them asking for proof of holding a valid BB and I would approach any representations in this way.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Mon, 6 Jun 2022 - 20:39
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



Thanks for the feedback. I amended and submitted the response today (running out of time). Just to note, NPE are part of IPC not BPA so I didn't mention BPA in my response.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Wed, 8 Jun 2022 - 12:11
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



Surprisingly they decided to cancel the charge, I guess someone does read the appeal after all.

Thank you all for your help.

I will still complain to the IPC although I know they are all in cahoots. I was fortunate enough to be able to handle this for my relative but am sure there are many out there getting caught for the same reason.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AlCapwn
post Fri, 10 Jun 2022 - 20:23
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 1 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,158



Would their issuing of this PCN be a breach of DVLA rules for accessing keeper data? They clearly didn't do their due diligence before accessing it
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 10 Jun 2022 - 22:27
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



They have no obligation to do due diligence.
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 - 12:24
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