ParkingEye PCN at Morrisons Stratford Car Park while Shopping, Didn't realise had to pay £1 and get refund, but have shopping re |
Helping the motorist get justice 
Helping the motorist get justice
ParkingEye PCN at Morrisons Stratford Car Park while Shopping, Didn't realise had to pay £1 and get refund, but have shopping re |
  Sat, 4 May 2013 - 17:00
Post
#1
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 1,197 Joined: 29 Sep 2003 From: London, UK Member No.: 376  |
So, still reeling after almost getting my car towed away and then getting clamped instead (topic here), me and the missus decided to go for some retail therapy, at Morissons, only to get another parking ticket for the pleasure!
I parked in their car park and I didn't read the signs - I just thought shoppers could park and any other users of the car park had to pay. That's how it has been in the past in most other supermarket car parks I've used. Obviously, the system is more comprehensive and automated now and had a much better catchment success, by shifting the onus on the shopper to do the work. Basically, all shoppers - rather than just park up, do their shopping, and patrol operatives work out who's a shopper and who's not - have to get a ticket from a machine for £1 and then present the tear-off bit to the checkout till after spending a minimum of £5 and the £1 is credited to their shopping bill. Here are the sign and machine clearly showing this: %20-%20Sign.jpg) %20-%20Machine.jpg) I didn't realise this and I parked thinking it was fine as I was a shopper. Then, I received this PCN in the post. I spoke to Customer Services in person at the store today and the girl said if I bring the notice in and my receipt (which I thankfully still have), they can "probably" cancel it. Interesting she said "probably" given that the PCN has arisen out of an error in process on my part, not out of a cost to the store for using the car park for something other than shopping with them which is supposed to be free. I'll take the notice there next time I'm passing (maybe this weekend); meanwhile, I'll e-mail ParkingEye to appeal on the grounds that I was shopping there and parking would normally be free; I just didn't follow the process; therefore, there is no cost to Morissons for my error: QUOTE I have received a Parking Charge Notice from you for parking in Morrisons car park in Stratford on 20 April 2013 without purchasing parking time from a machine. I note that there are signs and machines to this effect. However, I was a shopper at Morrisons at the time in question and I spent more than £5 in the store. I understand that this is a requirement for free parking, but I just failed to follow the required process of purchasing a £1 ticket and obtaining the refund at the checkout till. Therefore, there has been no cost to Morrisons as I was entitled to free parking. Unfortunately, I cannot provide any proof at this stage that I was a shopper at Morrisons. But, I have spoken to Customer Services at the store and they said I would be entitled to cancellation of the notice if I can prove I was a shopper. Please cancel the PCN and advise me of the same. I'm deliberately holding back the fact I have the receipt as this might make them ask me for proof of shopping by receipt thinking I don't have it or deny my appeal on the grounds I haven't provided a receipt. But, at least it backs them into a corner then. Or, they might just reject my appeal anyway, in which case it's off to Coventry they go. -------------------- Twitter
Notable Victories:
|
 |
 
|
 |
| Advertisement |
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 17:00
Post
#
|
 Advertise here! |
|
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 17:51
Post
#2
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,167 Joined: 6 Oct 2012 Member No.: 57,558 |
WTF is a 'Traffic space maximisation scheme' LOL
|
|
|
|
| Guest_Bogsy_* |
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 18:00
Post
#3
|
|
Guests |
What I find disconcerting is that the sign clearly indicates that you can park for 2 hours and yet ParkingEye's PCN's simply records an arrival time and a departure time. There is no recording of the actual time spent being parked. The danger here is that people will (and most probably do) receive PCN's for parking longer than permitted when the allegation is false. For example, you arrive at 09:55 but only find a space and park at 10:00, you return at 11:59 and are out of the parking space at 12:00 and then recorded as departing at 12:01. The "time in car park" will be 2hrs 6 mins but the time parked will only have been 2 hours as permitted.
If ParkingEye rely solely on arrival and departure times to assess how long a vehicle has been parked then you can bet loads of people are being cheated. |
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 18:01
Post
#4
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,007 Joined: 2 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,663 |
QUOTE (X-treem @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 18:00)  So, still reeling after almost getting my car towed away and then getting clamped instead (topic here), me and the missus decided to go for some retail therapy, at Morissons, only to get another parking ticket for the pleasure! You're on a roll. I'm gonna get a gin'n'tonic and sink into my comfy chair.... let the show begin. -------------------- Remember: No one can fine you or issue a penalty other than a court, a policeman or a local authority under legislative powers.
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 Further guidance on PoFA - DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 Essential Reading: Approved Operator Scheme (AOS) Guide to the Legislation - to learn how the private parking charges process works look at this flowchartParking on Private Land Appeals or POPLA is run by London Councils - the British Parking Association Ltd. (BPA Ltd) pays London Councils for this service. In fact, POPLA is a kangaroo court that rubber stumps private parking companies claims - read this Telegraph article and this Blog. The related documents can be found here. To see for yourself why POPLA has no legal powers and is not really independent please download and read this document from London Councils’ Transport & Environment Committee. More evidence that POPLA is not independent - read how PPCs are subverting the due appeal process and seek a back door deal to influence POPLA decisions. |
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 18:16
Post
#5
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,197 Joined: 29 Sep 2003 From: London, UK Member No.: 376 |
QUOTE (Bogsy @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 19:00) What I find disconcerting is that the sign clearly indicates that you can park for 2 hours and yet ParkingEye's PCN's simply records an arrival time and a departure time. There is no recording of the actual time spent being parked. The danger here is that people will (and most probably do) receive PCN's for parking longer than permitted when the allegation is false. For example, you arrive at 09:55 but only find a space and park at 10:00, you return at 11:59 and are out of the parking space at 12:00 and then recorded as departing at 12:01. The "time in car park" will be 2hrs 6 mins but the time parked will only have been 2 hours as permitted. If ParkingEye rely solely on arrival and departure times to assess how long a vehicle has been parked then you can bet loads of people are being cheated. Yes, it seems to be an increasingly used method now, similar to another PCN I had recently that is still ongoing. But, it's not relevant in this case and is really for edge cases that may well be accepted as valid mitigating circumstances by ParkingEye or other PPCs, and there may be a few minutes' grace period. Let's not labour it unless someone has a case where it's an issue. -------------------- Twitter
Notable Victories:
|
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 18:33
Post
#6
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,770 Joined: 17 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,602 |
WTF do you need to display a ticket in the windscreen if they use ANPR & you have entered your car registration into their system? Just another "offence" that they can charge you £85 for presumably.
BTW Tough **** if you forget the milk during your weekly shop & pop back an hour later only to cop an £85 "fine". -------------------- British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice(Appendix C contains Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 ) & can be found here http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Code-of-Pr...ance-monitoring
DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ing-charges.pdf Damning OFT advice on levels of parking charges that was ignored by the BPA Ltd Reference Request Number: IAT/FOIA/135010 – 12 October 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 18:38
Post
#7
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,197 Joined: 29 Sep 2003 From: London, UK Member No.: 376 |
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 19:33) WTF do you need to display a ticket in the windscreen if they use ANPR & you have entered your car registration into their system? Just another "offence" that they can charge you £85 for presumably. BTW Tough **** if you forget the milk during your weekly shop & pop back an hour later only to cop an £85 "fine".  Let's give them the benefit of the doubt for now and see if this PPC accepts reasonable mitigating circumstances. But, if they don't, we know I'll smash them down like a tow truck driving over a sinkhole.
-------------------- Twitter
Notable Victories:
|
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 20:17
Post
#8
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 2,012 Joined: 28 Jun 2004 From: High Wycombe Member No.: 1,353 |
I'm sure you'll pursue this with all your usual tenacity.
I'd have to say, though, I'm a little disappointed with one aspect - why would a City finance high flyer, with a Porsche and glamour model Latvian wife, be shopping at Morrisons? Surely M&S or Waitrose would be more in keeping with your lifestyle? -------------------- We'll fight them on the roads, we'll fight them in the courts, and we shall never, ever, surrender
Cases Won = 20 (17 as McKenzie Friend) : Cases Lost = 4. Private Parking tickets ignored: 3. Paid: 0. |
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 20:21
Post
#9
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,197 Joined: 29 Sep 2003 From: London, UK Member No.: 376 |
QUOTE (bargepole @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 21:17) I'm sure you'll pursue this with all your usual tenacity. I'd have to say, though, I'm a little disappointed with one aspect - why would a City finance high flyer, with a Porsche and glamour model Latvian wife, be shopping at Morrisons? Surely M&S or Waitrose would be more in keeping with your lifestyle? Ha ha, I wondered when someone would pick up on this and point it out. What can I say, I'm a northerner. 
-------------------- Twitter
Notable Victories:
|
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 20:23
Post
#10
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,007 Joined: 2 Dec 2012 Member No.: 58,663 |
QUOTE (bargepole @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 21:17) ... with a Porsche and glamour model Latvian wife ... Both could be seen as desirable but surely not in the same category as objects of desire!!??  -------------------- Remember: No one can fine you or issue a penalty other than a court, a policeman or a local authority under legislative powers.
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 Further guidance on PoFA - DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 Essential Reading: Approved Operator Scheme (AOS) Guide to the Legislation - to learn how the private parking charges process works look at this flowchartParking on Private Land Appeals or POPLA is run by London Councils - the British Parking Association Ltd. (BPA Ltd) pays London Councils for this service. In fact, POPLA is a kangaroo court that rubber stumps private parking companies claims - read this Telegraph article and this Blog. The related documents can be found here. To see for yourself why POPLA has no legal powers and is not really independent please download and read this document from London Councils’ Transport & Environment Committee. More evidence that POPLA is not independent - read how PPCs are subverting the due appeal process and seek a back door deal to influence POPLA decisions. |
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 21:50
Post
#11
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 14 Nov 2011 Member No.: 51,089 |
As far as I can tell the signage does not state a parking charge will be issued for an incorrect registration number, not shopping there or even not paying and displaying at all. The sign states "A parking charge will be issued for the following..." AFTER all of the stuff about £1 for 2 hours.
I'd also argue that at least half of the six 'contraventions' they do list, do not make sense. For example "Park only in marked bays", "Parents and Toddlers only in marked bays" and "Blue Badge Holders in marked bays". This is meant to be a contract, and yet they've used the same term "marked bays" in three very different contexts referring to three different things ('normal marked bays', 'Parent and Toddler marked bays' and 'Disabled marked bays'). From what I can see, you could only ever comply with those rules if you a) park in a marked bay and b) have a toddler and c) are also disabled. There's a reason why 'real' contracts are pages and pages long... This post has been edited by outlook: Sat, 4 May 2013 - 21:52 |
|
|
|
|
Sat, 4 May 2013 - 22:10
Post
#12
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,197 Joined: 29 Sep 2003 From: London, UK Member No.: 376 |
QUOTE (outlook @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 22:50) As far as I can tell the signage does not state a parking charge will be issued for an incorrect registration number, not shopping there or even not paying and displaying at all. The sign states "A parking charge will be issued for the following..." AFTER all of the stuff about £1 for 2 hours. I'd also argue that at least half of the six 'contraventions' they do list, do not make sense. For example "Park only in marked bays", "Parents and Toddlers only in marked bays" and "Blue Badge Holders in marked bays". This is meant to be a contract, and yet they've used the same term "marked bays" in three very different contexts referring to three different things ('normal marked bays', 'Parent and Toddler marked bays' and 'Disabled marked bays'). From what I can see, you could only ever comply with those rules if you a) park in a marked bay and b) have a toddler and c) are also disabled. There's a reason why 'real' contracts are pages and pages long...  There's one other way you could kill two birds with one stone. Have a disabled toddler with you. Right, next time I go shopping there, I'm going to walk around Westfield nearby and abduct a disabled kid. And if anyone says anything, I'll say it was so I could legally go shopping at Morrisons! To be honest, I don't think they care about display the ticket. There's no patrol - they just rely on ANPR. And as for non-shoppers, this is fine - that's where they get their non-punitive revenue from. -------------------- Twitter
Notable Victories:
|
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 00:44
Post
#13
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 4,433 Joined: 19 Oct 2003 From: Lancashire Member No.: 436 |
You could confuse them wth this pic. Morrisons at Skipton where PE's life was short lived. (Pay and Display machines are now covered)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Parking+Eye+Morrisons+Skipton Parking Eye Morrisons Skipton This post has been edited by DW190: Sun, 5 May 2013 - 01:00 -------------------- DW190
BLUNT PENCILS ARE MORE RELIABLE THAN SHARP MEMORIES |^^^^^^^^^^^\|| |www.PePiPoo.com_||'""|""\_____ |_________________||__ |__|____|) |(@) |(@)""**|(@)(@)**|(@)|(@) Frequently Asked Questions |
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 08:03
Post
#14
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 153 Joined: 14 Nov 2011 Member No.: 51,089 |
QUOTE (X-treem @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 23:10) QUOTE (outlook @ Sat, 4 May 2013 - 22:50) As far as I can tell the signage does not state a parking charge will be issued for an incorrect registration number, not shopping there or even not paying and displaying at all. The sign states "A parking charge will be issued for the following..." AFTER all of the stuff about £1 for 2 hours. I'd also argue that at least half of the six 'contraventions' they do list, do not make sense. For example "Park only in marked bays", "Parents and Toddlers only in marked bays" and "Blue Badge Holders in marked bays". This is meant to be a contract, and yet they've used the same term "marked bays" in three very different contexts referring to three different things ('normal marked bays', 'Parent and Toddler marked bays' and 'Disabled marked bays'). From what I can see, you could only ever comply with those rules if you a) park in a marked bay and b) have a toddler and c) are also disabled. There's a reason why 'real' contracts are pages and pages long... There's one other way you could kill two birds with one stone. Have a disabled toddler with you. Right, next time I go shopping there, I'm going to walk around Westfield nearby and abduct a disabled kid. And if anyone says anything, I'll say it was so I could legally go shopping at Morrisons! To be honest, I don't think they care about display the ticket. There's no patrol - they just rely on ANPR. And as for non-shoppers, this is fine - that's where they get their non-punitive revenue from. The thing is, the sign doesn't state that a ticket will be issued if you fail to pay either. It has six 'reasons' for issuing a ticket - the three above, parking in loading bays, parking on yellow lines and staying beyond two hours - none of which involve paying and/or displaying. Furthermore, on the ticket machine itself, it states you only need enter your registration number to "avoid" a charge. It says nothing about having to pay. Depending on how annoying you want to be, I'd lead my appeal by saying that they've broken their own alleged contract for issuing you with a charge when their sign gives them no such 'right'. |
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 08:19
Post
#15
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 2,553 Joined: 24 Jun 2005 From: London Member No.: 3,246 |
That signage fails to meet the standard required by Regulation 7 of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and as such it cannot be relied upon to demand a Parking Charge.
Read the sign and consider just what infringement actually causes a “Parking Charge” liability to arise? The sign states that “Failure to comply with the following will result in a parking charge of £85…………” It then lists six acts that all must be undertaken for that charge to arise. If Parking Eye wishes to rely on just one of those acts to impose a Parking Charge then the sign should say: “Failure to comply with any one of the following will result in a parking charge of £85…..” If there is any doubt as to the written terms of a contract then their interpretation will be one that is “most favourable to the consumer” (under those Regulations). On that basis, even if the vehicle had been parked for more than two hours no liability arises because the other five acts have not been carried out. (This is an issue, specific to Parking Eye's signage, that has been put before POPLA on a regular basis but the lack of a suitable contract has always negated the need for a POPLA decision on the matter so far) |
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 09:02
Post
#16
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 284 Joined: 14 Jan 2013 Member No.: 59,379 |
Any comments on the following sentences in the small print?
(1) "Parking is at the absolute discretion of the site" I doubt that "the site" has the legal capacity to make or vary a contract. (2) "Should a motorist fail to comply with the car park regulations, the motorist accepts that they are liable to pay a parking charge and that their name and address will be requested from the DVLA" So, no mention of the Registered Keeper details being requested. Finally, and as usual, the normal failure to comply with the Companies Act Disclosure requirements. |
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 09:41
Post
#17
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 249 Joined: 4 Nov 2007 Member No.: 15,086 |
I would like to see how anyone uses a loading bay when "strictly no parking within loading bays" is enforced
 .For unloading, I suppose you could drive slowly through the bay, hurling things out of the vehicle as you pass (parachutes optional), but for loading? .....perhaps one of the gadgets the Royal Mail used to pick up mail sacks on a moving train -- a hook in the bay for the bag and a net on the side of the vehicle  btw (@X-treem) I'm sure that your Russian wife was last seen going into a Moscow prison for arms smuggling, and your Latvian glamour model girlfriend had arrived via Luton. Am I mistaken, or are congratulations in order?
|
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 15:19
Post
#18
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,013 Joined: 17 Oct 2012 Member No.: 57,735 |
So, the car park is for the use of customers only, whilst shopping in store. So why are they charged and then get a refund?
Parking limited to 2 hours (no return within 1 hour). Park at 12, leave at 1359, back at 1500, leave at 1659. Dont tell me you're not getting a ticket. First in, last out WILL always apply here, we just know it will. I cant see how anyone can park on the site. The only things allowed in marked bays are parents and toddlers and BB holders. Where do they put their vehicles while occupying the spaces themselves
|
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 17:48
Post
#19
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,197 Joined: 29 Sep 2003 From: London, UK Member No.: 376 |
So, should ParkingEye not accept my appeal favourably, then there's a couple of points I can go on:
QUOTE (Ossian @ Sun, 5 May 2013 - 10:41) btw (@X-treem) I'm sure that your Russian wife was last seen going into a Moscow prison for arms smuggling, and your Latvian glamour model girlfriend had arrived via Luton. Am I mistaken, or are congratulations in order? Yes, you're right! I just hope these PPCs are not so vigilant to notice what a portentous lifestyle I lead. They might stitch me up on Jeremy Kyle and draft in all my sexy Eastern European concubines in! -------------------- Twitter
Notable Victories:
|
|
|
|
|
Sun, 5 May 2013 - 18:24
Post
#20
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,770 Joined: 17 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,602 |
I just took a look at the PCN & see that apart from the obvious (they can't bring themselves to name the creditor) they are in breach of the BPA CoP (not discounted by 40% for prompt payment)
QUOTE 19.7 If prompt payment is made, you must offer a reduced payment to reflect your reduced costs in collecting the charge. The reduction in cost should be by at least 40% of the full charge. ‘Prompt payment’ is defined as 14 days from the date the driver or the keeper received the notice. Adherence to the CoP is a condition of membership of the BPA AOS & hence access to the DVLA data. There are other bits that you can pick holes in as it does not invite the keeper to pay the charge or supply the name & address of the driver but states "If you were not the driver at the time, you should tell us the name and current postal address of the driver" Keeper liability as per POFA is discharged when the driver is named but PE claim "If you identify someone who denies being the driver then we will pursue you for any Parking Charge" The description of the "offence" as "Either not purchasing the appropriate parking time or by remaining at the car park for longer than permitted" is too broad to my mind. They should either specify that the driver didn't pay or that they overstayed. POFA requires the PPC to describe the parking charges and "the circumstances in which the requirement to pay them arose". There is a big difference between an overstay where the driver has paid & non payment. -------------------- British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice(Appendix C contains Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 ) & can be found here http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Code-of-Pr...ance-monitoring
DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ing-charges.pdf Damning OFT advice on levels of parking charges that was ignored by the BPA Ltd Reference Request Number: IAT/FOIA/135010 – 12 October 2012 |
|
|
|
 |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Tuesday, 16th April 2024 - 06:42 |
