1 second overstay |
1 second overstay |
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 21:41
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 490 Joined: 10 Oct 2004 Member No.: 1,737 |
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 21:41
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 21:55
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Too right, the signs were clear and visible.
-------------------- 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. |
|
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2018 - 22:05
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
Can;t beleive he paid it!
-------------------- |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 08:12
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Can't believe he paid it! The picture shows him with a LBCCC so it appears the sausage machine was going to raise an actual claim. I doubt they would have taken it to a hearing mind. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 08:49
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,195 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
As parking eye are not usually that fast and loose with the CoP, I do wonder if there is something else about this case we aren’t knowing.
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 09:36
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Possibly, but I believe they progress their POPLA victories when they have authority to sue.
-------------------- 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. |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 10:13
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,768 Joined: 17 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,602 |
I too wonder if there is more to this one as both PE & POPLA know that the CoP mandates a grace period for departing at the end of parking which must be more than 1 second.
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 13:05
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
Did it not dawn on him that passing between a camera twice isn't the same as the length of time actually parked, or have I missed something?
-------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 13:56
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
I too wonder if there is more to this one as both PE & POPLA know that the CoP mandates a grace period for departing at the end of parking which must be more than 1 second. You know how POPLA works... Unless the appellant raised the question over grace periods then they would conclude the PCN was 'correctly issued'. It's plain wrong but that's what happens. Indeed, the CoP says: QUOTE 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. So even a '20 minute only short stay' parking area is covered... They appear to be in breach of the CoP. Did it not dawn on him that passing between a camera twice isn't the same as the length of time actually parked, or have I missed something? Computer says no. They are obviously running a 0 seconds grace period. This post has been edited by Jlc: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 13:58 -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 14:00
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,768 Joined: 17 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,602 |
I too wonder if there is more to this one as both PE & POPLA know that the CoP mandates a grace period for departing at the end of parking which must be more than 1 second. You know how POPLA works... Unless the appellant raised the question over grace periods then they would conclude the PCN was 'correctly issued'. It's plain wrong but that's what happens. Indeed, the CoP says: QUOTE 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. So even a '20 minute only short stay' parking area is covered... Did it not dawn on him that passing between a camera twice isn't the same as the length of time actually parked, or have I missed something? Computer says no. They are obviously running a 0 seconds grace period. Exactly. As a minimum of 10 minutes is mandated in the CoP with a “must” the PPC & POPLA should automatically add ten minutes to any limit i.e. 20 minutes maximum stay is actually 30 minutes. -------------------- 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 |
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 18:54
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
Can;t beleive he paid it! Indeed, it would have been a good one to take to court and ask for costs on the grounds of being a wholly unreasonable claim. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Wed, 18 Apr 2018 - 19:05
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,195 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Assuming the facts and basis for the claim are as reported, I’m fairly confident we don’t have all the relevant information as PE, while being the most litigious, are also the most structured and I don’t recall seeing any from them where the alleged time was within the mandated grace period (may have been 1s outside it which would be very defendable in court of course).
-------------------- 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 |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 10:52 |