PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Premier Park PCN - overstaying maximum period, An interesting one - ambiguous / deceptive signage + right of access
K.I.T.T.
post Thu, 19 Jul 2018 - 21:40
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 4 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,531



Esteemed members, it's been a while since I've sought advice on challenging an unfair 'ticket'. Let time was against a council and with your help, I won. This time it's a private company

A local railway station has a pay and display car park, but it's accessed by another car park that belongs to a leisure venue. They have ANPR at the entrance to this. It is signposted 'railway parking this way' or similar, but, it appears that you have to actually drive right to the back of the car park, where there are some signs saying 'you are now leaving the leisure venue', or similar, where again, there are some ANPR cameras. I only found this out today when I went to investigate. The thing is, to leave, you'd have to come back the way you entered.

Entrance (to leisure venue) - ANPR ----> pay and display ticket machine for railway car park -----> ANPR (entrance to railway car park / 'exit' to leisure car park) ----> railway car park -----> dead end.

I used google maps and added some narative to better explain the layout:



You cannot exit the railway car park any other way than 'entering' and leaving the leisure car park again.

It would appear if the second ANPR camera clocks you, you're good. The driver paid for a ticket (for the station car park - which I have in my possession), parked up and displayed it.

This was last week. I, the RK got a PCN in the post today which I have posted below. Annoyingly, the driver did the same thing earlier this week getting the train, so perhaps I'll get another PCN soon?





I also include signage and how, in my opinion, it is unclear as where the threshold of the railway car park and leisure car park begins / ends. Annoyingly, the driver usually drives to a closer station and leave the car on a a residential road with no issue. The station parking signs on top of the T&Cs again make it unclear.

ANPR - entry

DSC_0611 by https://www.flickr.com/photos/12257823@N03/, on Flickr

Station car park 'entry' and ticket machine and ANPR camera. Also, more confusing signage.






Signs directing you to station parking:





Leisure car park signage (with confusing station parking sign)



Hopefully that makes sense?

Any words of wisdom? Both for this PCN as well as the one I will undoubtedly receive next week.

The pictures they have may identify the driver.

Many thanks in anticipation.

This post has been edited by K.I.T.T.: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 - 11:55
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 14)
Advertisement
post Thu, 19 Jul 2018 - 21:40
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 07:10
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,169
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



The pictures they have cannot identify the driver, as theyre just photos unconected to a name unless the Keeper tells them the name!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 07:56
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,748
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



In the first instance write to them, as the keeper, with a copy of the rail parking ticket and ask them why you would have need to use their facilities when you had paid to use the facilities in the railway car park. Suggest that their ANPR system needs alignment to correctly identify those that use the railway car park.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 08:11
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,169
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Where did the driver actually park?
I cant see that this was confirmed as being in the Railway car park.

If they did park in the railay car park, include this evidence and state on the balance of probabilities the driver parked in the railway car park nad the KNOWN FLAWED ANPR system has simply missed the entry to the railway car park. The failure of their system is none of your concern, and the only reasonable cause of action is to cancel the PCN and apologise for accessing your data without reasonable cause.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K.I.T.T.
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 10:28
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 4 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,531



Thank you for your responses.

I cannot confirm, on here, where the vehicle itself was parked (ie, inside the blue area or not), however, the driver did purchase a ticket from the machine and parked in the vicinity of the machine.

The intent was to park in the station car park, and, I do have in my possession the ticket. The time on the ticket is three minutes after the time they recorded the car entering the car park (ie, where the ANPR camera is by Mayson St in the image).

From doing a reconnaissance visit yesterday, it would appear if the ANPR camera further up, near the section I outlined in blue, does not record the vehicle 'leaving' the car park (or in other words, entering the station car park), it then gets picked up as the vehicle had been parked in the leisure car park, not the station car park, when the vehicle leaves. In this case when the driver returned from their train, and left the premises.

As such, it appears to be an automated operation, and, I suspect they don't have images of where the car itself was actually parked. Just images and timestamps of entry and exit at the camera by Mayson St.

The signage is also confusing as to where the threshold for the leisure car park ends / station car park begins. As demonstrated, some of the leisure centre signs have a station parking sign with an arrow, which could be interpreted as park on that side for the station.

Also, this is further compounded by this sign:



'Railway parking beyond this point only' - so, does that mean the leisure venue customers are not to park beyond this point or railway users shouldn't park behind this point?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
generaldbody
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 11:10
Post #6


Member
Group Icon

Group: Bad Boyz & Girlz
Posts: 256
Joined: 5 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,563



Situation looks very confusing - two payment machines side by side for different car parks.

K.I.T.T I'd like you to send to me a PM on a related issue with PP which may help you but I cannot comment in public?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K.I.T.T.
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 11:22
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 4 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,531



QUOTE (generaldbody @ Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 12:10) *
Situation looks very confusing - two payment machines side by side for different car parks.

K.I.T.T I'd like you to send to me a PM on a related issue with PP which may help you but I cannot comment in public?


Hello,

Thanks for your reply. There is only one payment machine (that I am aware of?), which is for the station car park. The leisure venue car park itself is free, however, you can't stay longer than four hours. This is basis for their invoice.

Signage is also misleading with the leisure venue car park T&Cs having a station parking sign above them with a direction arrow.

I shall PM you shortly.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 12:07
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,748
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



QUOTE
As such, it appears to be an automated operation, and, I suspect they don't have images of where the car itself was actually parked. Just images and timestamps of entry and exit at the camera by Mayson St.


It is completely automatic, there are no sensible and responsible beings involved in the process. They do not, indeed, know where the car was parked.

You could always ask them where the car was parked.

This post has been edited by ostell: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 12:09
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K.I.T.T.
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 19:15
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 4 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,531



Thank you again, for all your responses.

I've been doing a little more digging and reading.

Are there any obvious issues with the PCN that you can see? To me, there are a few issues:

  • Within 29 days - Regarding the first point, there has been some mention around the 29 day period Premier Park state, to not hold up, although I wasn't able to fully digest / understand this myself.
  • Date of issue vs date of receipt - The discounted period is within 14 days of issue; should this not be from when it was served ie, allowing for the postal services to deliver the invoice?
  • Administration charge of £0.50 - Is this actually allowed?


Also, what is this nonsense?



29 days of what? and the discounted period again, seems to run from the date of issue, rather than the date the PCN was served.

I can't see anywhere that the PCN states that x / discounted amount, must be paid from xx days of receipt. I've mentioned the issue with the discounted amount and how this is flawed, but £xxx due within 29 days, seems to be all they say. 29 days of what?

So, what would be the best way to tackle this? There seem to be several options.

As stated, I have in my possession, a station ticket for that day, minutes after the ANPR clocked the vehicle entering. They can't actually prove (I believe**) that the car was parked in the car park they manage, but merely that the car entrered and left at a particular time and day (well, this would apply to any car that was going to or leaving the station car park). **The only images they appear to have on their online payment system are the ones on the letter. There is no evidence to suggest where the car was actually parked.

Do I appeal on the above basis? I expect it to be rejected, of course.

Do I, at this stage, highlight flaws (well, I believe there are flaws, please correct me if I'm wrong) with the wording on the PCN regarding timescales? Also, their PCN states within 29 days, but the signage states 'if after 28 days the PCN remains unpaid'.

Also, the signage on site says 'Parking period commences 5 minutes after entry', however, for the duration they allege the vehicle was parked on that car park, they have merely looked at the difference between entry and exit time, not taking the 5 minute 'grace period' into consideration.

This post has been edited by K.I.T.T.: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 22:04
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 19:57
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,591
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: Hampshire
Member No.: 16,066



Check to see if the area the vehicle was parked in is, in fact, railway land and, therefore, subject to byelaws. If so, it is not relevant land under PoFA.


--------------------
Cabbyman 9 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K.I.T.T.
post Fri, 20 Jul 2018 - 20:44
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 4 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,531



Cabbyman, I would suspect the PPC don't have any evidence of where the vehicle itself was parked - merely one of their ANPR cameras clocked the vehicle entering and leaving at certain times, with the intention of parking in the station car park, as supported by the ticket.

I have, earlier, speculated how I assume their system works, ie, the vehicle would have to also be clocked by the other camera. If this is indeed the case, it would suggest that if a vehicle is not clocked by the second camera, for whatever reason, and the car was parked in the station car park (with or without a ticket, which isn't relevant in this case), the RK would receive a PCN.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K.I.T.T.
post Sat, 21 Jul 2018 - 17:20
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 4 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,531



This is my proposed response - any criticisms or objections?

QUOTE
Many thanks for your invitation to pay an alleged parking charge.

I must however dispute the alleged contravention and liability for payment.

The images you have merely indicate that the vehicle in question was captured by your ANPR system at xx am and xx pm, and is not proof that it was parked at that location.
I include a copy of a ticket for the station car park, that was purchased by the driver on the day of the alleged offence at xx am, minutes after being captured by your ANPR system.

As the driver had paid to use the station car park, which is accessed via Mayson Street, where you appear to have an ANPR system, why would they have the need to use your facilities?
You have not provided any evidence that the vehicle has parked at the location for the duration, merely that the vehicle passed through your ANPR system at the specified times - there is no other route to the station car park, other than via Mayson Street.

As the vehicle was not parked in the car park you manage, the PCN has no basis or merit, nor do you have any reasonable cause for accessing the registered keepers data.

Hugs and kisses,
Chewbacca


Thanks again.

And perhaps, I should send an FOI to Network Rail to find out how much of the land they actually own, as cabbyman suggested. This could take four weeks, however. Is there a quicker way of obtaining this information (happy to pay a nominal fee)?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Sun, 22 Jul 2018 - 13:37
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,591
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: Hampshire
Member No.: 16,066



The Local Authority may have the information as to proprietorship of the land. The signage in the station car park, which you haven't shown yet, may also hold further clues, as will changes in the ground surface.

It's worth the effort because, if it is railway land, subject to byelaws, you are home and dry.

EDIT: Why use FOI? A quick visit to the station or a phone call may elicit the information quite easily.

People have a tendency to overuse FOI unnecessarily, in my view. My local authority say please ask us; it keeps down costs if we reply directly rather than using FOI. Use FOI to obtain information which may not be readily obtainable by 'gentler' means.

This post has been edited by cabbyman: Sun, 22 Jul 2018 - 13:41


--------------------
Cabbyman 9 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
K.I.T.T.
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 20:40
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38
Joined: 4 Aug 2010
Member No.: 39,531



So, I sent off the following letter last week:

Many thanks for your invitation to pay an alleged parking charge relating to the vehicle above, registered to myself.

I must however dispute the alleged contravention and liability for payment.

I include a copy of a ticket for the Blackburn railway station car park, purchased by the driver on the day of the alleged offence at 0802, minutes after being captured by your ANPR system at 0759.

You have not provided any evidence that the vehicle was parked at the location you manage, merely that the vehicle passed through your ANPR system, located at Mayson Street, at the specified times. The only way the station car park can be accessed and left is via Mayson Street.

As the driver had paid to use the station car park, which you have no jurisdiction over and is subject to railway byelaws, why would they have the need to use your facilities?
As the vehicle was not parked in the car park you manage, the PCN has no basis or merit, nor do you have any reasonable cause for accessing the registered keeper’s data.


And received this:



I presume I'm not under any obligation to name the driver? So, what happens next?

I assume no intelligent being actually read what I wrote, and this is an automated general resonse. I also don't see the relevance of PoFA as they haven't provided any evidence that the car was parked on the car park they 'manage'.

Regarding the signage for the station car park:





PS: Not sure why the above two appear to be rotated. The originals aren't!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 10 Aug 2018 - 08:12
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,169
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Of course you dont have to mention the driver.

Entirely automated where no driver was named. Ignore, they will reject, usual story.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 16th August 2018 - 17:34
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.