Parking Charge Liverpool |
Helping the motorist get justice 
Helping the motorist get justice
Parking Charge Liverpool |
 Sun, 29 May 2022 - 08:37
Post
#1
|
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 29 May 2022 Member No.: 116,749  |
Good Morning,
The driver entered the Beetham Plaza Car Park in Liverpool before driving around to find a space. Having found one they got out of the car and then noticed there was a lot of glass on the floor, from what they suspected might have been smashed windows. They then decided to leave and find another car park which they did. They were in the Beetham Plaza car park for seconds over 5 minutes (taken from the PCN) and have now been issued with a £100 Parking Charge.from Parking Eye. The drivers’s question is, are the circumstances likely to be taken account if they choose to appeal? Thank you. This post has been edited by Trivium: Sun, 29 May 2022 - 08:38 |
 |
 
|
 |
| Advertisement |
Sun, 29 May 2022 - 08:37
Post
#
|
 Advertise here! |
|
|
|
|
|
Thu, 2 Jun 2022 - 06:55
Post
#21
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 889 Joined: 22 Jan 2022 Member No.: 115,469 |
Before finalising the appeal language, please note that there's a school of thought in this forum that the language of the PCN does not conform to the requirements in POFA for transfer of liability to the keeper in that the statutory requirement for an invitation to the keeper to pay the charge or identify the driver is not present - specifically there is no invitation to pay and instead of inviting the keeper to identify the driver it commands that the keeper "should" identify the driver.
Maybe consider the following? "I am appealing as registered keeper. I decline to identify the driver. There has been no transfer of liability to the keeper as the PCN does not contain the invitation required by paragraph 9.(2)(e) of Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Furthermore, the driver entered the car park and drove down to the underground parking levels trying to find a suitable space. The driver then noticed the amount of glass on the floor in the parking spaces. As the driver intended to leave the car overnight they chose not to accept any contract and left. The PCN states that the time the driver was in the car park was 0 hours and 5 minutes. The BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice states the minimum grace period is 5 minutes so as per the Code of Practice the charge should not have been issued As a result the registered keeper is appealing the PCN based on the facts above. |
|
|
|
|
Thu, 2 Jun 2022 - 08:21
Post
#22
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Personally I'd leave it to the simplest fact. An appeal to the ppc is doomed to failure, so I wouldn't cloud the issue. But you do you.
|
|
|
|
|
Sun, 26 Jun 2022 - 21:45
Post
#23
|
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 29 May 2022 Member No.: 116,749 |
Are you all sitting down? Here's the verdict from the PPC:
Dear Sir / Madam, We are writing in relation to the Parking Charge incurred at Beetham Plaza, Liverpool car park. We would like to confirm that this charge has now been cancelled and there is no outstanding payment due. We understand that receiving a Parking Charge Notice may be inconvenient, however, issuing Parking Charges for breaches of the parking terms and conditions at this car park is necessary to ensure a better overall parking experience for all users of the facilities. To avoid potential future inconvenience, we would kindly request you follow the parking terms and conditions displayed on the signage throughout the car park. Huge thanks for all who helped. The driver (it genuinely wasn't me!) is a very happy person tonight.  (Post #18 details the exact wording used in the appeal). This post has been edited by Trivium: Sun, 26 Jun 2022 - 21:51 |
|
|
|
|
Sun, 26 Jun 2022 - 21:55
Post
#24
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 10,695 Joined: 23 Apr 2004 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 1,131 |
Time to buy a lottery ticket.
|
|
|
|
|
Mon, 27 Jun 2022 - 07:28
Post
#25
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 41,585 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
QUOTE (Trivium @ Sun, 26 Jun 2022 - 22:45)  We understand that receiving a Parking Charge Notice may be inconvenient, however, issuing Parking Charges for breaches of the parking terms and conditions at this car park is necessary to ensure a better overall parking experience for all users of the facilities. To avoid potential future inconvenience, we would kindly request you follow the parking terms and conditions displayed on the signage throughout the car park. Why do they feel the need to use a template with such condescending words... This post has been edited by Jlc: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 - 07:28 -------------------- RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information, SAR=Subject Access Request Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it. |
|
|
|
|
Mon, 27 Jun 2022 - 09:43
Post
#26
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 28,687 Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,642 |
Well done! Blimey, that rarely happens!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Tuesday, 16th April 2024 - 20:58 |
