HI Can someone help me here?
There were 2 PCNs on my car from NCP, both from the same attendant. The correct fee had been paid for a weeks parking but the car had bee accidentally parked in a staff bay. This was totally accidental as the car was parked at 3am on a Monday so there were dozens of spaces to choose from. There aren't any signs and it appears the only indication is white lettering on the floor which has mostly worn away, the "S" is gone as has part of the "T" in staff. But at 3 am it is very dark and totally ambiguous
Can this be appealed as the markings were damaged and there didn't appear to be any other signage, and are they allowed to give two tickets for the same offence?
Bos
So what do the signs say about different bays?
Apart from the writing on the floor there aren't any signs other than one pointing to the payment machine, but the fee was paid by phone
I think they have just replaced all the lights or my phone made it brighter as it did not look that bright last week! Also what about two tickets for the same offence?
The car has a weekly ticket surely that means you are allowed to stay for a week?
Yes, but I'm talking about whether they think you've breached the contract once or twice. It depends on what it says in the contract. In this case, the contract is the sign displayed at the location.
Hi, it says that the maximum stay is 7 days, so presumably I shouldn't have 2 tickets?
Instead of guessing, a photo of the sign in daylight plus in the dark and the bay markings in the dark please.
What does the sign say about parking in specific bays?
I have attached a photo of the sign, If it is the tiny writing in the terms and conditions then it would be totally unreasonable to be expected to red that in the dark. As it is there is insufficient contrast on the signage I think, don't they have to comply with DDA regulations?
I have added a photo of the sign in the dark, but with flash, I have posted another of the car park in the dark, but I am sure they have replaced the lights as it is much brighter now.
Do they seriously expect motorists to read all that small print when they're about to catch a train? Where is the Big Red Hand?
Typical NCP microfont T+C's. But the 'core' terms do not mention 'per 24 hours /day'.
Those terms and conditions run to about 2000 words
They would take an average adult at least six minutes to read
Nobody has that sort of time at a railway station
So what do people reckon I should do?
A photo of the bay would be useful, taken in the dark as the one in daylight isn't too hard to make out
Also the sign placement and wording taken in the dark
[/quote]
So can someone advise please on a course of action? The staff at the railway station said "just ignore it"!
You need to get this killed off at POPLA - otherwise they can technically hassle you for 6 years.
The most important thing is not to identify the driver. This ticket is issued under contract law whereby the driver, as a party to the parking contract, is liable for its breach. But they don't know who that was. For this reason, with most contract tickets the parking company can pursue the keeper instead (whose details they can get from the DVLA) under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, schedule 4 (POFA). It's known as keeper liability.
However this is a railway station car park which is presumably subject to the Railway Byelaws. If so, POFA doesn't apply and there is no keeper liability. If there is no evidence as to who was driving, POPLA will allow the appeal. So make sure there is nothing in your previous posts identifying the driver. Always refer the driver in the 3rd person - the keeper did xyz.
The first stage will be to appeal to NCP as the keeper. Make sure you make it clear you are appealing as keeper. Keep it short and simple, along the lines of: "I am appealing as keeper; the land is subject to the railway Byelaws; it was only one parking event anyway; please cancel the tickets."
The appeal will almost certainly be rejected, but that is the only way to get access to POPLA. The appeal to POPLA will be more detailed, but that's for another day and there will be plenty of time for you look at similar cases on here and on MSE.
Surely the fact the original photo with the two charges of daily or weekly infers that (assuming you paid the weekly fee) that 24 hours isn't relevant?
As guessed, they have rejected the appeal and said I have 28 days. What is the next course of action please?
POPLA appeal which you should have already been preparing!
Use a sample from another thread, edit to suite and post for critique.
First point should be PoFA not applicable due to byelaws so no keeper liability.
Hi Guys, this is what I have cobbled together from other letters, but I honestly don't understand most of it!!
Is this OK?
The letter needs to make clear that this was a station car park where railway Byelaws apply. NCP chose not to manage the car park using those Byelaws, instead using civil contract law and issuing Parking Charge Notices which represent damages for alleged breach of a parking contract. Irrespective of the choice made by NCP, the land in question is not "relevant land" for the purposes of Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012, so there is no possibility of any keeper liability. Only the driver could be liable to pay the parking charge.
You don't need to mention their failure to comply with the conditions required by Schedule 4 of POFA in order that the keeper be held liable. Since Schedule 4 does not apply in this situation, the conditions associated with holding the keeper liable under this legislation are irrelevant to your appeal.
---------------
You could mention that the Beavis ruling applies to an overstay in a free car park where the parking charge notices were the only source of income for the parking operator. Furthermore, the car park in the Beavis case was serving a shopping centre. The judges ruled that £85 was not punitive (ie a penalty, which is only normally allowed in criminal cases not in civil parking cases) because there was a need for the parking operator to earn an income and to provide a deterrent to over-stayers to maintain a turnover of customers in the local shops. (This was termed "commercial justification").
This situation is different. (1) The car parking is paid-for all day and the parking operator receives a fee for its services from the Train Operator irrespective of how many parking tickets are issued. (2) The car park serves a railway station, it does not serve shops. Taking these two facts together, then there is no commercial justification here for punitive parking charges which are higher than a genuine pre-estimate of loss (GPEOL) - which would just be the normal cost of the parking.
Can anyone help here, I am trying to upload my revised letter but its saying the file size is too large, it's only 93k
How do I free up some space as it says I have used 1.86MB of 1.95MB
You dont. You read the READ FIRST sticky, and you upload to a site such asIMGUR, tinypics.
How did I do it last time?
A bit of a palava this!!
From what I can see, you haven't mentioned that because Rail Byelwas apply, it's not relevant land under POFA.
If you have mentioned it, an assessor is going top find it difficult to find with the poor formatting.
Where are your photos? You MUST embed those within the appeal to show how poor the signs and floor markings are
Why is Keeper liability at the bottom?! And itw awful. It does not reference the precise point of POFA FIRST which is that
1) this is station land
2) It is subject to byelaws which control parking
3) POFA2012.... states that this is thereofre "not relevant land" and so there can NEVER be keeper liability.
Look Guys,
I am not much of a wordsmith and I don't really understand any of this and it is getting more convaluted. Does anyone have some standard paragraphs I can use if mine are not correct? I am running out of time.
The upshot is.
1 the parking fee had been paid but the vehicle was in a staff bay
2 Signage is awful, there are no eye level signs indicating a staff bay and the letters are worn away on the floor, difficult to see in the dark.
3 They put two tickets on even though you can stay for 7 days
4 It was at a railway station
Thanks
Oh well it's gone. NCP did cancel one of the tickets however.
Wait and see now?
Just to let people know the outcome. NCP cancelled the second PCN and my appeal was up held through POPLA. Thanks to all for the guidance.
: D
Great news, can you post up a copy of the popla result so others in similar circumstances can view.
Basically they said that the evidence was withdrawn by the operator as a gesture of goodwill!
There is no letter or other information as such
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)