PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

broken ticket barrier/confusion RUH Bath, Didin't pay to park, confused by broken ticket barrier, received P
mountainman
post Wed, 12 Dec 2018 - 23:04
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,411



I went with my wife to A&E at RUH Bath on 13/05/18 at around 7.30. didn't want to park in the short stay car park, so drove on to the next car park by the maternity unit.
on entering the car park I came to the ticket barrier which on my previous visit 4 years before at the time of the birth of our son had worked.
The barrier was broken and not issuing tickets, I assumed that it was just waiting to be fixed, not seeing any sign informing of other ways to pay for parking decided that it must be free to park.

went for the visit (waste of time) and left 2.5hrs later

On 08/06/18 my wife (keeper of the vehicle ) received a PCN for £80
I appealed online on their website, they sent more PCN's on 17/06/18 (to my wife) and on 27/06/18 (to me).

I was confused, they didn't respond to the points that I had raised in the appeal, and I didn't realise they had responded via email, (27/06/18) so I didn't see the rejection of my appeal and missed the time to appeal to POPLA.


Since then I have received a "LETTER BEFORE COUNTY COURT CLAIM" LETTER (10/10/18)
On 08/11/18 I wrote to Parking eye using a template letter I found online saying there was insufficient signage/ the charge was disproportionate/ and that the LTK was incorrect as it had been sent 26 days rather than the correct? 14 days after the event (not sure if this point is valid)

After sending this I received a Claim form ( dated 15/11/18) from parking eye's legal representative

and then on 26/11/18 I received an email from Parking eye saying that they had received my response to LBCCC that my charge was on hold and they will respond within 30 days.

I also wrote to PALS at RUH Bath on the 29/11/18 explaining the situation re the broken ticket machine, offering to pay the lost revenue and asking them as the land owner to ask Parking eye to drop the charge, they said they were unable to assist, when I pressed the matter with more explanation they contacted the parking team to see if they could assist, the response from them is that they are unable to cancel the PCN.

So, any advice about what to do would be greatly appreciated

This post has been edited by mountainman: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 - 00:12
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Wed, 12 Dec 2018 - 23:04
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Jlc
post Wed, 12 Dec 2018 - 23:23
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 41,510
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: Planet Earth
Member No.: 49,223



If you have a claim then you must deal with that - it won’t be on ‘hold’. Has it been acknowledged?

Sounds like a non-PoFA ticket for which not being the driver is potentially a good defence.

Does the first letter you received make reference to keeper liability / Protection Of Freedoms Act?

This post has been edited by Jlc: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 - 23:24


--------------------
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 09:10
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



OK, I think you are possibly in trouble

With an issue date of 15.11.2018 you are out of time to submit a defence, and the claimant (Parking Eye) can obtain a CCJ against you NOW, unless you have acknowlwedged the claim online. Have you done so?

IF you have acknowledged the claim online, then this deadline is extended to 33 days from date of issue (28 days from date of service) and so yo uare JUST in time but you need to entere a defence now!

OP, by waiting so long to respond, you did not meet the 30 days deadline in the LBCCC. Hence why you got a claim

JLC - sounds like they have found a driver - the OP - based on the third PCN presumably being a notice to driver and the claim form, also based on "I", being sent to the OP
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 09:11
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



From your description the first PCN was out of time to be able to hold the keeper liable. However, in your appeals etc have you identified the driver (yes or no)? I suspect you have. What did the letter to you say?

You talk about a claim form. Was this from Northampton and probably claiming £175 ? If it was then you may very well find you already have a judgement against you, by default, if PE have been quick of the mark.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 09:32
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Althoguh it could be argued moving for a default, having stated the claim was on hold, was an abuse.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bearclaw
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 09:35
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: 15 Nov 2017
Member No.: 95,103



Indeed I'm not sure that the term promissory estoppel would apply to proceedings but it sounds like PE shouldnt be making such a default claim....

This post has been edited by bearclaw: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 09:36
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 09:38
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Its not promissory estoppel, its one side in lititagion stating they will pause.
It requires the claimant making an action in order to get the default; the court doesnt just award

But we need the OP to come back and explain why they thought ignoring a court claim form was a good idea.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 18:58
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



QUOTE
After sending this I received a Claim form ( dated 15/11/18) from parking eye's legal representative

Bung an acknowledgement in tonight on MCOL (no asking how to do it - just follow the picture version shown on MSE parking forum NEWBIES thread post #2) and then show us a quick draft defence (again, no need to ask how to write a defence as there are templates in that MSE NEWBIES thread, grab a simple one or a similar one and get drafted.

BUT online Acknowledgement FIRST, tonight, right NOW.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Thu, 13 Dec 2018 - 21:50
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



and nothing in the defence
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mountainman
post Fri, 14 Dec 2018 - 02:00
Post #10


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,411



Hi, thanks for the help so far!
I had not acknowledged the claim form, partly through staling , having a sense of hopelessness and not knowing what to do (only found this forum recently) and am having other problems with my marriage which take up a lot of time/headspace etc.

anyway, I have acknowledged it tonight.

all the PCN's received were the same, nothing mentioning NTD.

the letter to me (LBCCC)

LBCCC
We write regarding the above referenced PCN, which concerned a breach of the terms and conditions on the (date) at Royal United Hospital Bath -4.
Please note that this charge was levied for breach of contract.

When PE rejected your appeal, you were provided with 28 days to lodge appeal with POPLA, This 28 day period has passed and you have not appealed to POPLA or paid the parking charge in full.
we now require full payment of outstanding charge £80. payment details etc.

If you wish to contact PE then you must do so within 30 days of 10/11/18 using the enclosed reply form.
If further action is required to recover and court action ETC
further costs will be incurred.
Please note no interest or costs have been added at this stage.

'Then goes on to reference BEAVIS case as a justification for the PC amount'

signed PE legal dept'



"Does the first letter you received make reference to keeper liability / Protection Of Freedoms Act?"
not that I am aware of, it doesn't use these terms





don't think I identified who the driver was, but may have mentioned that my wife had a broken wrist which could mean that they assumed I was the driver.
this is the letter I wrote to PE on 8/11 after getting the LBCCC, I wrote it from my wife, as I didn't believe that I had disclosed who the driver was

Dear Sir or Madam, 08/11/2018

Ticket number: ...............
Vehicle registration number: .....................

You issued me with a parking ticket on 08/06/2018.
I believe it was unfairly and illegally issued. I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following reasons:

• There was insufficient signage
The car park in question has no clear signage to explain what the relevant parking restrictions are. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally.


On entering the car park I passed by the old ticket barrier that I had used three years previously when at the hospital during the birth of my son.
The machine appeared out of use, it had not been removed and I saw no clear signage stating that there was a new process/machine so it appeared that the machine was broken and hadn’t been fixed yet, therefore there was no way to pay.
On leaving my car and walking to the A&E department I saw no other signage.



• The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable
The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

In my case, the £80.00 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner of 2.5 hours parking I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.


The notice to keeper is incorrect
The Notice to Keeper failed to meet the obligations of Schedule 4 of the POFA Act 2012.

The notice to keeper was sent on the 08/06/2018, 26 days after the date of the event, it should have arrived within 14 days.


I wrote to you, stating my reasons on the 14/06/2018, through the appeals process on your website as stated on your letter (dated 08/06/2018).
You did not respond to the points of my appeal but sent the same parking charge notice on the 17/06/2018 and again on the 27/06/2018.

You also state in your letter of 10/10/2018 that Parking eye rejected my appeal.
I have not received this correspondence from you.
Due to this I have not had the opportunity to lodge an appeal with POPLA.

If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I will not enter into any correspondence and this will be the only letter you will receive from me until you answer the specific points raised in my letter.

Yours faithfully,

(wife's name)


Not sure what to write as defence except the situation with the broken ticket machine and no obvious sign near it as one enters the car park

This post has been edited by mountainman: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 - 21:03
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Fri, 14 Dec 2018 - 09:06
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



I've lost track of this!! Is it you or your wife that has received the county court claim?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Fri, 14 Dec 2018 - 09:17
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



You should be contacting the CEO of the trust and asking why they are flouting then governments guidance on private parking which emphasis that genuine users shouldn't be penalised for genuine mistakes and that private parking enforcement should only be used against those abusing the system, RUH PALS is well known to be useless. You should also complain to your MP that they are failing to follow government guidance.

Don't let that detract you from the claim though, you have been complacent as PE could have had a default judgement against you by now, stalling when you don't hold the right cards is very dangerous.


--------------------
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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Fri, 14 Dec 2018 - 12:05
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



You MUST get a defence written

I know youre not in the right headspace but failing to do this WILL mean you lose, and you WILL have to pay up

To be honest from the trail my guess is someone iddentieid the driver, and so POFA is likely not important

However, this IS a penalty, BEAVIS CANNOT apply as there is no commercial justification etc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Fri, 14 Dec 2018 - 15:57
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,751
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



I would be putting in a defence based on bargepole's concise template from MSE, right now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mountainman
post Sat, 15 Dec 2018 - 00:32
Post #15


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,411



Hi, thanks for sticking with me!

the claim form was sent to me.

the claim form is from Northampton.

I still don't think I revealed the driver, the PC to me states on the back
"If you were not the driver at the time etc"

this PC is dated the 27/06/18, I submitted my appeal on the PE website on the 14/06/18
the letter I wrote (from my wife) in my last post, was sent from my email address, but I often write /represent my wife as she struggles with forms/paperwork.

do you think it's worth doing a SAR to see what I wrote on my appeal (stupidly don't have a copy) or is it a waste of time at this stage?

should I state who the driver was in my defence statement?

"However, this IS a penalty, BEAVIS CANNOT apply as there is no commercial justification etc."

Does this mean that I can claim that the charge is disproportionate ?



here is my defence, not sure how relevant some of the points are, I've just looked at other defences and tried to fine points that may apply

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No ...........

BETWEEN :

PARKING EYE

And

Me


1.
I am the defendant ………………………….

2. Save as specifically admitted in this defence the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim, or implied in Pre-action correspondence.


a) Broken ticket machine: there was a broken ticket barrier at the entrance to the car park, I was confused by this and thought that I could not pay for parking, had the machine been working I would have paid for parking.

b) The manager of the Patient Advise and Liaison Service at RUH Bath acknowledged there was confusion regarding the broken ticket machine and stated “I am sorry for any confusion over the ticket machines and I will be sure to forward your email on the Parking management team to look into.”


c) Insufficient signage: there were no signs by the broken ticket machine informing me I should pay elsewhere. This means no contract can be
formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally.




3.
The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable
The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

In my case, the £80.00 from the claimant far exceeds the cost to the landowner of 2.5 hours parking I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.


4.
The Claimant’s solicitors are known to be a serial issuer of generic claims similar to this one, with no diligence, no scrutiny of details nor even checking for a true cause of action. HMCS have identified over 1000 similar sparse claims. I believe the term for such conduct is ‘roboclaims’ which is against the public interest, unfair on unrepresented consumers and parking companies using the small claims track as a form of aggressive, automated debt collection is not something the courts should be seen to support. On the basis of the above, I request the court strike out the claim.


5.
It is submitted that the Claimant is merely an agent acting ‘on behalf of’ the landowner who would be the only proper claimant. Strict proof is required of a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to this Claimant, to allow them the right to form contracts and to sue in their name.


6.
The facts and information in this defence are true and the Defendant is not liable for the sum claimed, nor any sum at all.



thanks again everyone!

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Sat, 15 Dec 2018 - 09:00
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,088
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



How does the Particulars of Claim describe the defendant, driver or keeper?

I would edit so that ony "the driver" is referenced.

Yes, I would send a SAR to PE and also get your wife to send one to see the total documentation. Here's a template
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 15 Dec 2018 - 09:26
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,126
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Put #5 at the top after #1 and lose #4 completely

Add a new point :

The enforcement of the Parking Charge is in breach of both the British Parking Association Charter for Hospital Parking and Health Technical Memorandum 07-03 NHS Car Parking Management
.
The Defendant asserts that these documents specific to hospital parking are at least as authoritative as the Claimant's general Code of Practice.
The Defendant respectfully reminds the Court that ParkingEye v Beavis states the Claimant cannot recover a penalty unless it is in compliance with its Code of Practice

This post has been edited by Redivi: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 - 09:26
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mountainman
post Sat, 15 Dec 2018 - 23:34
Post #18


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,411



QUOTE (ostell @ Sat, 15 Dec 2018 - 09:00) *
How does the Particulars of Claim describe the defendant, driver or keeper?

I would edit so that ony "the driver" is referenced.

Yes, I would send a SAR to PE and also get your wife to send one to see the total documentation. Here's a template



the particulars of claim only mention "the defendant" neither driver or keeper.

If I send a SAR to PE should I wait before submitting my defence?
(it seems to me that I should submit my defence ASAP as I've already missed the required period within which to reply).
or should I submit defence between PE and "the driver" like this? NOW, and also send a SAR, (I will also be writing to the CEO of the hospital and my MP as suggested by "The Rookie") should I put my name in point 1. or just "the driver" ?

IN THE COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No .............

BETWEEN :

PARKING EYE

And

The Driver


1.
I am the defendant ……(my name)…………………….

2.
It is submitted that the Claimant is merely an agent acting ‘on behalf of’ the landowner who would be the only proper claimant. Strict proof is required of a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to this Claimant, to allow them the right to form contracts and to sue in their name.



3.
Save as specifically admitted in this defence the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim, or implied in Pre-action correspondence.


a) Broken ticket machine: there was a broken ticket barrier at the entrance to the car park, I was confused by this and thought that I could not pay for parking, had the machine been working I would have paid for parking.

b) The manager of the Patient Advise and Liaison Service at RUH Bath acknowledged there was confusion regarding the broken ticket machine and stated in their email to me dated ../../.... “I am sorry for any confusion over the ticket machines and I will be sure to forward your email on the Parking management team to look into.”


c) Insufficient signage: there were no signs by the broken ticket machine informing me I should pay elsewhere. This means no contract can be
formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally.




4.
The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable
The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

In my case, the £80.00 from the claimant far exceeds the cost to the landowner of 2.5 hours parking I therefore feel the charge you have asked for is excessive.



5.
The enforcement of the Parking Charge is in breach of both the British Parking Association Charter for Hospital Parking and Health Technical Memorandum 07-03 NHS Car Parking Management
.
The Defendant asserts that these documents specific to hospital parking are at least as authoritative as the Claimant's general Code of Practice.
The Defendant respectfully reminds the Court that ParkingEye v Beavis states the Claimant cannot recover a penalty unless it is in compliance with its Code of Practice


6.
The facts and information in this defence are true and the Defendant is not liable for the sum claimed, nor any sum at all.






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Mon, 17 Dec 2018 - 08:23
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,687
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



YOU CANNOT MISS THE DEFENCE DEADLINE

Youve been told this. You ve been told to get the BARGEPOLE simple defence in ASAP, or at least the one you did above

The SAR would never have been responded to in time, if they wanted to drag it out. They have 1 month for a SAR
The SAR is used for after the defence stage

Youre burning time whe you already know you are out of time
Nothing stops PE form claiming a default if you miss the deadline, and you wilL NOT be able to get the default set aside, unless the court is feeling quite generous.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mountainman
post Tue, 18 Dec 2018 - 07:40
Post #20


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 12 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,411



OK, thanks for all the help so far! It's very much appreciated!

I am sorry if I am being slow, I'm just trying to get my head round what to do and to understand the "language" and the words and terms used, it all takes quite a bit of time to get familiar with.

I have submitted my defence, I did it as a word document attached to an email to CCBCAQ@justice.gov.uk,

I know said to print, sign, scan, convert to PDF, but I don't have access to a printer, and I wanted to get it in,

Is a word document accepted?

In The County Court

Claim No: ...........

Between
PARKING EYE (Claimant)

-and-

My name (Defendant)



DEFENCE


1.
The Defendant was the keeper of vehicle registration number ............... on the material date. The Defendant denies that the Claimant is entitled to relief in the sum claimed, or at all.


2.
It is submitted that the Claimant is merely an agent acting ‘on behalf of’ the landowner who would be the only proper claimant. Strict proof is required of a chain of contracts leading from the landowner to this Claimant, to allow them the right to form contracts and to sue in their name.



3.
Save as specifically admitted in this defence the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim, or implied in Pre-action correspondence.


a) Broken ticket machine: there was a broken ticket barrier at the entrance to the car park, the Defendant was confused by this and thought that parking could not be paid for, had the machine been working parking would have been paid for.

b) The manager of the Patient Advise and Liaison Service at RUH Bath acknowledged that there was confusion regarding the broken ticket machine and stated in their email to the Defendant on 04/12/18. “I am sorry for any confusion over the ticket machines and I will be sure to forward your email on the Parking management team to look into.”


c) Insufficient signage: there were no signs by the broken ticket machine informing the Defendant that parking should be paid for elsewhere. This means no contract can be formed with the landowner and all tickets are issued illegally.




4.The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable
The amount charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

In this case, the £80.00 charge from the Claimant far exceeds the cost to the landowner of 2.5 hours parking therefore the Defendant believes the charge is excessive.



5.
The enforcement of the Parking Charge is in breach of both the British Parking Association Charter for Hospital Parking and Health Technical Memorandum 07-03 NHS Car Parking Management
.
The Defendant asserts that these documents specific to hospital parking are at least as authoritative as the Claimant's general Code of Practice.
The Defendant respectfully reminds the Court that ParkingEye v Beavis states the Claimant cannot recover a penalty unless it is in compliance with its Code of Practice


6.
The facts and information in this defence are true and the Defendant is not liable for the sum claimed, nor any sum at all.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 06:30
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.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here