CCP NTK for no ticket displayed, NTK from CCP for Sainsbury's Eltham |
CCP NTK for no ticket displayed, NTK from CCP for Sainsbury's Eltham |
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 15:46
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
I'm submitting the following on behalf of my Dad who as registered keeper of the vehicle has received the NTK attached below.
A bit of an intro into the situation: He was not the driver of the vehicle, as he and my mum had flown to Lanzarote earlier that day. A family member had access to their car while they were away and had tried to pay for a ticket at Sainsburys but didnt have any change. They spoke to the ticketing jobsworth to ask if there was any way to pay with notes or card but he was most unhelpful not providing any other option (which it then turned out to be he could have directed them to an alternate machine across the car park that did accept card payments). Having told the CPP employee that they would have to then get change, they visited the store and opted to quickly pick up the shopping items they needed (a basket of items that took inside 10 mins to collect – still has receipt) but came back to a ticket on the windscreen. Confronting the issuer of the PCN, he was apologetic but said he was unable to retract it. He claimed he would however send an email to the company to say it was incorrectly issued. Additionally he signed the submitted ticket with a message to say “Please cancel ticket, it was a misunderstanding” and offered for a photo with his ID card to be taken too: No one has spoken to CCP as of yet as they were waiting to see if an NTK was issued in case the email from the attendant was successful but as anticipated, either it wasn’t sent or if so it was disregarded. Here is the NTK: No photo evidence on the letter but it is available online: No golden ticket as far as I can see in that they mention POFA and have sent the NTK dated on 30th day (although craftily it wasn’t received until at least a week later) after the event. They mention signage and based on photo 5, I guess it’s hard to argue that signage isn’t clear. Would really appreciate advice on the best course of action to appeal this one please. Is it even worth starting to try appealing based on the attendant agreeing the ticket was issued in error ? Thanks Mike This post has been edited by Mike_S: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 17:07 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 15:46
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 15:53
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,887 Joined: 16 Jul 2015 Member No.: 78,368 |
Do not speak to CPP, you have no record of what is said and they will try to get information from you that you do not have to divulge.
Is it a Sainsbury car Park? Have you asked to speak to the MANAGER only and explain what happened, especially as you have a receipt. Also, explain the scam these people are conducting. This post has been edited by Dave65: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 15:54 |
|
|
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 16:05
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,283 Joined: 5 Jan 2012 Member No.: 52,178 |
No golden ticket as far as I can see in that they mention POFA While the NtK may have the required POFA wording, does the NtD? Not from what you have posted. Was there more on it than you have shown in the picture? Does it, for example, "inform the driver of ... the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available," i.e. the appeals process? It doesn't show the period of parking either. So POFA fail. Make sure you don't reveal who the driver was, either here or to DE. Maybe edit the first line of your post. |
|
|
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 16:43
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
Do not speak to CPP, you have no record of what is said and they will try to get information from you that you do not have to divulge. Is it a Sainsbury car Park? Have you asked to speak to the MANAGER only and explain what happened, especially as you have a receipt. Also, explain the scam these people are conducting. Yes it is a Sainsbury's car park. I haven't spoken to the manager but will do, although don't hold up much hope of having any success as they often seem to push back from responses I've seen with other supermarkets charge threads here. cheers Dave |
|
|
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 16:57
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
No golden ticket as far as I can see in that they mention POFA While the NtK may have the required POFA wording, does the NtD? Not from what you have posted. Was there more on it than you have shown in the picture? Does it, for example, "inform the driver of ... the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available," i.e. the appeals process? It doesn't show the period of parking either. So POFA fail. Make sure you don't reveal who the driver was, either here or to DE. Maybe edit the first line of your post. Sorry, I only posted the part of the NtD showing the attendant's statement & signature. I think the rest of the NtD seems to have required verbiage: My dad is the registered keeper of the car but wasn't the driver. I don't think I have named any drivers in the thread but have slightly reworded if you think I suggested who the driver might have been beforehand. cheers This post has been edited by Mike_S: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 17:08 |
|
|
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 19:49
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,887 Joined: 16 Jul 2015 Member No.: 78,368 |
It's only the MANAGER to speak to not customer services.
Then to Head Office CEO with complaint. Someone here may have contract details. Still edit your post "the driver" had access to the car. This post has been edited by Dave65: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 - 19:52 |
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 13:01
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
It's only the MANAGER to speak to not customer services. Then to Head Office CEO with complaint. Someone here may have contract details. Still edit your post "the driver" had access to the car. I wasn't able to edit my post last week as it seems there is a 7 day window before it gets locked - will try asking Mods for assistance I've just come back from Sainsbury's having spoken to the (assistant) store manager last Wednesday and gave them all the paperwork. They were going to speak to CCP and were meant to call me back but never did call so I had to go in store again having not been able to speak to management on the phone. The actual manager has been out for the past week but the staff who did (apparently) speak to CCP over the weekend told me that CCP has pushed back saying apparently Sainsburys can't request for a cancellation for either customers or staff. CCP are obviously BSing but the Sainsburys personnel don't have a scooby when it comes to speaking to the parking company as they all seemed to think it was a council run car park and don't understand the process for telling the . I will put an email together to send to both the manager and head office but am aware that the deadline for rejecting the NtK is tomorrow so would appreciate advice on best route for the online appeal. Is signage still a grounds as it looks like the car was photographed right in front of one? Can they/I prove grace period was/wasn't given ? Other points to include will be: GPEOL CCP not land owner Keeper was not the driver and didn't park the car where alleged Anything I'm missing ? thanks Mike |
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 13:33
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
Sainsbury's
Mr Mike Coupe Chief Executive mike.coupe@sainsburys.co.uk Point out that Sainsbury's are the Principal in a Principal / Agent contract relationship and you do not accept that they cannot tell their own appointed sub-contractor what to do. Point out that - in light of the conversation the driver had with the parking warden - that you are being scammed, and you will be happy to share Sainsbury's compliance in this scam with your Social Media friends. This post has been edited by ManxRed: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 13:36 -------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 13:45
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
-------------------- 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, 3 Jul 2018 - 13:46
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
Sainsbury's Mr Mike Coupe Chief Executive mike.coupe@sainsburys.co.uk Point out that Sainsbury's are the Principal in a Principal / Agent contract relationship and you do not accept that they cannot tell their own appointed sub-contractor what to do. Point out that - in light of the conversation the driver had with the parking warden - that you are being scammed, and you will be happy to share Sainsbury's compliance in this scam with your Social Media friends. Thanks Manx, that's very helpful. will draft an email using your template when I get a moment |
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 13:47
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
Yeah, GPEOL went to the great parking graveyard in the sky some years back.
-------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 13:56
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
Really? you're obviously more in the know than me but I thought GPEOL was still acceptable at a pay to stay car park ? Thought that the Beavis issue was there was no fee to park... The parking charge must be an estimate of likely losses flowing from the alleged breach in order to be potentially enforceable. Per Item 46 in Lord Justice Moore-Bick's judgement of the case of Parking Eye vs Beavis, "...It would not be afforded by a system of imposing a rate per hour according to the time overstayed, unless that rate were also substantial, and well above what might be regarded as a market rate for the elapsed time....." Yeah, GPEOL went to the great parking graveyard in the sky some years back. Oh OK, my misunderstanding |
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 14:07
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 9,985 Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Member No.: 21,992 |
Well, you're right, if you can demonstrate differences between Beavis and your own circumstances then it could be used, but it's a complex set of issues, so we tend to avoid them where possible.
-------------------- Sometimes I use big words I don't understand in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis.
|
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 14:45
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
Fair point, I'll avoid GPEOL then. Thanks for the advice.
So is it best to leave it fairly bare bones ?: Re PCN ######## I deny any liability to Car Parking Partners. I was not the driver and did not park vehicle registered ******* at the alleged location. There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn, nor was there an agreed contract. Therefore I will not make the payment that you have demanded, neither is there any point to further discussion of the subject. Firms of your ilk were unanimously condemned in 2018 as operating an 'outrageous scam' (Hansard 2.2.18). The BPA & IPC were heavily criticised too; hardly surprising for an industry where so-called AOS members admit to letting victims 'futilely go through the motions' of appeal and say on camera 'we make it up sometimes' (BBC Watchdog). I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner |
|
|
Tue, 3 Jul 2018 - 15:01
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,510 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
Things are never that simple - at all levels below court I wouldn't introduce a discussion around 'loss'. After all, in the present case a tariff wasn't paid at all before the ticket was issued. (Arguably the purpose of the parking charge is there to dissuade)
There's possibly an argument for going slightly over time, say from a £2 to £4 tariff band. But Beavis will be quite widely applied - not just for overstaying a 'free' car park. (Take no parking situations such as permits - trespassing aside...) -------------------- 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, 3 Jul 2018 - 16:26
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
Thanks Jlc.
I won't bother with GPEOL. Does the rejection letter in my previous post seem acceptable enough ? |
|
|
Wed, 4 Jul 2018 - 17:06
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
Deadline for "appeal" was today so I've submitted the above in light of no further comments.
Thanks Jlc & ManxRed for the feedback thus far. |
|
|
Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 14:06
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 66 Joined: 2 Feb 2014 Member No.: 68,472 |
Well, this has dragged on for some time but to inform those who kindly assisted at the beginning that this has thankfully ended in a successful appeal through POPLA.
Correspondence with the store manager was a total waste of my time and despite many emails back and forth he was still unable to grasp the concept of the store owning the land and therefore having the right to determine who they wish to be penalised or not. My POPLA appeal covered a few points with the main being whether the operator has the appropriate authority to act on the land in question. Liberty services (cap parking partnership) evidence pack contained lots of site maps and photos of signs but only provided a summary statement to say they have authority from the landowner but provided no official evidence. It was thanks to this that the assessor summarised their review with the following: “I must consider whether the operator has provided evidence in order to satisfy the requirements of Section 7 of the BPA Code of Practice. Section 7.1 of the BPA Code of Practice states that if the operator does “not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent).” On this occasion, the operator has failed to provide any evidence in response to this ground of appeal. As such, the operator has failed to demonstrate that it issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) correctly. Therefore, I do not need to consider the other grounds of appeal raised by the appellant. This appeal must accordingly be allowed.” The assossor seemed to feel that they had met all POFA requirements and that a contract with the owner as responsible for the vehicle had been established. So I was happy to see the contract with land owner not provided as I feel that my other points of appeal wouldn’t have held up too well. Thanks again to @Jlc & @ManxRed for giving my initial appeal your input. |
|
|
Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 17:01
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
Excellent result but surprising
POPLA decided some months ago to accept witness statements as evidence of the contract Did I read recently that the BPA has instructed that operators must no longer write these statements themselves and they must be provided by the landowners ? The question's probably academic I have yet to see a landowner statement that was on its own headed notepaper |
|
|
Sun, 21 Oct 2018 - 17:38
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18,751 Joined: 20 Sep 2009 Member No.: 32,130 |
Looks like there was not even a Witness Statement. Doomed to fail, not sure why PPCs bother.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 01:38 |