Regent parking Options

[ayran]

I as the Registered Keeper got a PCN from regent parking for allegially parking for 2hours 38minutes. The Driver did not park for this long. The Driver had driven into the parking area and did a u turn and drove out. I the Registered Keeper appealed this and asked for CCTV footage. They rejected the appeal and wrote:

Thank you for your appeal against the above Parking Charge Notice ('PCN') which has been carefully considered, however, on this occasion,the appeal has been rejected for the reason(s) detailed below.
Your vehicle was observed as entering onto private land, without registering for a virtual permit, in breach of the terms and conditions of parking. Notice of these terms is served by way of numerous large warning signs which are displayed at prominent places throughout the site including the points of entrance and egress.
Whilst we note the contents of your appeal, we would advise that vehicles must always be registered when parked at this location. No matter how long the vehicle is onsite. Failing to do so results in a breach of the terms and conditions. These rules apply to all vehicles, at all times with no exceptions.
You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and you now have two options (you cannot do both):
- You can pay the discount amount due of £60.00 within 14 days (see reverse of letter for payment options).
- or you can appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) if you believe this decision is incorrect
In order to appeal the IAS will need your PCN number, vehicle registration and the date the charge was originally issued. The IAS (www.theIAS.org) provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. As you have complied with our internal appeals procedure, you may use and we will engage with, the IAS Standard Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal to them within 21 days of this rejection


I am not sure what to do.

This post has been edited by ayran: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 - 10:11

[Advertisement]

[Sheffield Dave]

Edit your post to avoid hinting at the identity of the driver. "The driver" drove around the car park, while you, the registered keeper got the paperwork and are dealing with it,

So (using a third-party hosting site as suggested in the FAQ) post up a copy of the PCN with personal info redacted, but times and dates kept.

So how long was the driver in the car park? Was it literally go just past the entrance, do an immediate U-turn and exit, or did the driver drive a around looking for a parking spot or something, then decide to leave? Did the car visit the site twice, 2 hours and 38 minutes apart?

[ayran]

It was a U turn, It was to drop someone off, yes it was entered twice I believe. I don't have the parking notice with me however the entrance time was 10/11/2021 12:59 and the exit was 10/11/2021 15:37. I have asked for photos and CCTV as driver is unsure however they gave me that reply please let me know. Thank you

[Jlc]

So the car was there at the times specified but did not stay?

If so, this is a known issue with ANPR called a 'double dip' where some middle exit or entry was not detected properly.

Although, I see their approach is to claim that no time whatsoever is allowed without being registered. Of course this is nonsense but let's see the signs. Such 'rules' are usually deployed at airports but makes no sense at residential location where there has to be some period to decide whether to accept the contract or not. (Or simply go about one's way)

[ayran]

Sorry for late reply, I have gone back to the location and got a photo of the sign. Please see below

https://ibb.co/dJ4cv3y

[Jlc]

Double-dip aside (which appears to be the case here?) - the signs seem 'standard' and do not support an 'instant charge' like an airport road.

Indeed, the first two terms contradict - how can a visiting vehicle have a permit at all times? (As the next clause states it has to be registered in a terminal)

Therefore, as is standard practice, there has to be a short period of time to either accept the contract or leave. The latter seems to be the case here.

[The Rookie]

. I have asked for photos and CCTV

What makes you think there is any CCTV?

What photos have you asked for?

[ayran]

I asked for CCTV. They have two photos of the car and driver and passanger and 2 photos of the front licence plate. I asked for CCTV to show That the driver was parked for that time because it’s impossible

[Sheffield Dave]

They never have CCTV. They use ANPR, which just takes a photo whenever it detects a number plate.

[The Rookie]

You also failed to do the edit as described in post 2.

If you come for advice it’s best to use it, asking for CCTV just shows you as ill informed when you want them to think you fully informed and a tougher target.

[ayran]

What do you Recommend me replying to them then.

[Fluffykins]

You've been strongly recommended to edit your posts.

Several times

Do that first

[The Rookie]

They will accept no 'appeal' because nothing makes them.

The IAS is no better.

This is just an invoice, If I sent you an invoice for a new conservatory you didn't ask for or receive you wouldn't pay it you would write back stating clearly why nothing was owed. This isn't an appeal (they like to use that as it gives them a veneer of legitimacy they don't deserve) this is stating why the service you are being invoiced for didn't occur.

So write out a clear and concise letter explaining that, post here for critique before posting. You need to add the fact that ANPR is know not to be 100% accurate and that this 'double dip' is a well known failure as a result.

You can expect a barrage of rebuttal and meaningless debt collection letters, but a good strong rebuttal at this stage makes a court claim a lot less likely.

[ayran]

Please check this:

Dear Sirs,

I have received a PCN for a parking offence on the 10/11/2021. The parking offence is issues for The Driver allegedly parking on premises for for 2 hours 38 minutes. This is incorrect. The vehicle entered the premises at 12:59 and immediately exited the premises. This was picked up by the APNR system. I would like to bring to your attention that the APNR system is not reliable and has many flaws. This is one example as the vehicle has been a victim of ‘Double dip’ this is where the APNR system has flagged the car entering multiple times as the vehicle retuned at 15:37 and left immediately again. This invoice received is incorrect.

This is my first time doing this so am a bit unsure.

[The Rookie]

OK, it's not an offence, it doesn't breach any law, it's an event.

A parking offence can't be issued, the parking notice is.

ANPR is 'known not to be 100% reliable' don't include 'many flaws' you're guessing (AGAIN).

The rest is an inaccurate word salad, seriously spend more than 5 seconds on it. The ANPR has only flagged twice (not multiple), you should have the second entry and exit mentioned after the first. How can an invoice be inorrect? Think what you are describing.


EDIT those F-ing posts....NOW, no more replies from me until you do.

[hcandersen]

OP, pl explain:

It was a U turn, It was to drop someone off, yes it was entered twice I believe. I don't have the parking notice with me however the entrance time was 10/11/2021 12:59 and the exit was 10/11/2021 15:37

So the driver or drivers entered twice. The first time to drop-off a passenger......but what about the second time? Was this a repeat or did the driver actually park within a marked bay - they didn't first time, surely.

This post has been edited by hcandersen: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 - 12:56

[ayran]

The driver came to pick up the passenger. No they did not park in the bays. They didn’t park once during those times.

[ayran]

Please could someone check this as I have less than 3 days to submit the appeal. I appreciate all help. I would like to advise that this is my first time on this site and am not sure about all things hence why I am asking for help

Dear Sirs,

I have received a PCN for an alleged parking offence on the 10/11/2021.

The parking “offence” is issues for The Driver who has allegedly parked on premises for for 2 hours 38 minutes. This is incorrect.

Yes the vehicle entered the premises at 12:59 and immediately exited the premises. The basis of this was that the driver was dropping someone off. This was picked up by the APNR system. However the vehicle had left within 2 minutes. The APNR system is not relatable and is 'known not to be 100% reliable’.

This is the case In this instance. The vehicle registration XXXX XXX has been a victim of ‘Double dip’. The vehicle has been flagged by the APNR system entering the system at 12:59 and has not been flagged leaving the premises. The vehicle as returned to the premises to pick someone up at 15:37. This was flagged up by the APNR. This is why it believes that the vehicle was parked on site when it was not. The driver has evidence of being elsewhere during the that time. The vehicle did not park in any bay even when returned at 15:37.

We have requested CCTV/Photos proving that the vehicle was parked on site. Your last reply has dismissed this. I request you investigate this matter and check. There will be no payment as this is invoice is incorrect. I am not liable to pay under this clear error made.

Kind Regards

[The Rookie]

Please could someone check this as I have less than 3 days to submit the appeal.

Read this thread AGAIN..... the 3 days is irrelevant isn't it, you've been given that information.

Second time, it's not a bl**dy offence.

As you won't read what I, and others, have gone to the time of writing for you, I won't read the rest until you do, seems fair?

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 - 15:15

[The D Team]

I wouldn't state that the driver entered the carpark to perform an action (dropping someone off). I would say something like, the driver rejected the offer to park and left within a reasonable consideration period in both cases.