Britannia Parking PCN Options

[niacuk]

Cutting to the chase.....

The driver (in car) entered a gated Britannia site in Plymouth in order to have breakfast with a friend. A good meal and a few coffees were enjoyed and 3.5hrs later the driver exited the site and headed home.

Today the driver gets a lovely pair of photos through the door and a request for £85 on the grounds that the driver stayed too long. 3hrs is apparently the limit on the site, regardless of whether or not you are a paying restaurant customer. The pictures of the car are good but not of the driver. Date and time makes sense and it all looks legit. But, is the driver really expected to pay the fine for enjoying the restaurant for 30 minutes longer than they'd like you to? Do they expect the driver to just get up and leave their meal and friend to meet the criteria of the parking company?

Ignore or not?

[Advertisement]

[Dave65]

Post up a copy of the PCN with all personal details redacted, leave the dates.

[SchoolRunMum]

it all looks legit.

Nope.

is the driver really expected to pay the fine

Nope, and it's not a fine.

Ignore or not?

Nope. Appeal like everyone does, as keeper. Was the PCN received by day 14?

[niacuk]

Post up a copy of the PCN with all personal details redacted, leave the dates.

I'll do this shortly

[niacuk]

Here you go

it all looks legit.

Nope.

is the driver really expected to pay the fine

Nope, and it's not a fine.

Ignore or not?

Nope. Appeal like everyone does, as keeper. Was the PCN received by day 14?

Yeah, it only took them a few days to process it and it was received in 8 days

This post has been edited by niacuk: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 21:06

[ostell]

So have you contacted the eatery you were using to complain?

This is a commercial port and Brittany Ferries is all around. There are byelaws in existence so see if you can find out if the byelaws cover the area of the car park.

Who actually raises and lowers the barrier?

This post has been edited by ostell: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 08:18

[niacuk]

So have you contacted the eatery you were using to complain?

This is a commercial port and Brittany Ferries is all around. There are byelaws in existence so see if you can find out if the byelaws cover the area of the car park.

Who actually raises and lowers the barrier?

Nope, but the eatery website says the parking is controlled by the port management. The barrier is raised and lowered remotely by somebody who is at the end of an intercom. You buzz in and buzz out.

The keeper does plan to call the port management to ask if the charge notice can be canned on the grounds that the driver was a customer at the restaurant.

This post has been edited by niacuk: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 08:51

[nosferatu1001]

The driver never does anything. The keeper does it all.

[niacuk]

The keeper has contacted the restaurant and has been advised that it is not their doing or their issue.

The keeper has also contacted the port management and has been told to contact Britannia as it is their parking system despite it not being Britannia's land.

[Jlc]

Today the driver gets a lovely pair of photos through the door and a request for £85 on the grounds that the driver stayed too long. 3hrs is apparently the limit on the site, regardless of whether or not you are a paying restaurant customer.

Yeah, crazy isn't it?

But Barry Beavis thought that too and 'lost' at the Supreme Court under similar circumstances.

However, as above, all is not lost and you should not automatically pay - especially for this PPC...!

[niacuk]

The keeper has appealed the PCN on the grounds that the driver was present as a paying customer and that the late exit was due to the late arrival of one of the guests. The driver was visiting friends that had not been seen for 5 years. One of which is a recent cancer patient (like the driver) so the pace of events is not what you'd call speedy thanks to the treatment said friend has recently had.

Anything else the keeper should do?

[nosferatu1001]

Well, not appealing straight away would have been helpful.
You need to check to see if this is covered under maritime byelaws. If so there is NO KEEPER LIABILITY as this is "not relevant land". You will need to research this to build your POPLA appeal.

[cabbyman]

It looks as though the marina car park falls well within the area controlled by byelaws:

http://www.abports.co.uk/admin/content/fil...%20BYE-LAWS.pdf

http://www.abports.co.uk/admin/content/fil...%20Plymouth.pdf

Therefore this is not relevant land as defined by PoFA and the keeper cannot be held liable. Do a bit more research locally to be certain.

EDIT those images you have posted. I can see three places where an identifying PCN reference is visible.

This GSV view is to the 'land' side of the marina and would tend to indicate the extent of ABP's interest:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.367778,-4...33;8i6656?hl=en

This sign also appears to be in ABP's colours, with the marina CP still ahead in the distance:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.3676076,-...33;8i6656?hl=en

I would also suggest that the high flint and stone wall is the boundary of the port area which supports my contention of non-relevant land.

[SchoolRunMum]

The keeper has appealed the PCN on the grounds that the driver was present as a paying customer and that the late exit was due to the late arrival of one of the guests. The driver was visiting friends that had not been seen for 5 years. One of which is a recent cancer patient (like the driver) so the pace of events is not what you'd call speedy thanks to the treatment said friend has recently had.

Anything else the keeper should do?

Prepare for POPLA (read other threads about POPLA appeals at maritime locations with byelaws) because that will lose at this stage - mitigation is pointless.

Hope you didn't say who the driver was?

[Spclexus]

It looks as though the marina car park falls well within the area controlled by byelaws:

http://www.abports.co.uk/admin/content/fil...%20BYE-LAWS.pdf

http://www.abports.co.uk/admin/content/fil...%20Plymouth.pdf

Therefore this is not relevant land as defined by PoFA and the keeper cannot be held liable. Do a bit more research locally to be certain.

EDIT those images you have posted. I can see three places where an identifying PCN reference is visible.

This GSV view is to the 'land' side of the marina and would tend to indicate the extent of ABP's interest:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.367778,-4...33;8i6656?hl=en

This sign also appears to be in ABP's colours, with the marina CP still ahead in the distance:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.3676076,-...33;8i6656?hl=en

I would also suggest that the high flint and stone wall is the boundary of the port area which supports my contention of non-relevant land.

Cabbyman this is local to me, carpark is well within the boundary wall and further 100yd+ past the abp sign in the first link. If you google further into ferry youll spot restaurant and carpark behind it. Not close enough to see signs on google though. Hth.

[niacuk]

It looks as though the marina car park falls well within the area controlled by byelaws:

http://www.abports.co.uk/admin/content/fil...%20BYE-LAWS.pdf

http://www.abports.co.uk/admin/content/fil...%20Plymouth.pdf

Therefore this is not relevant land as defined by PoFA and the keeper cannot be held liable. Do a bit more research locally to be certain.

EDIT those images you have posted. I can see three places where an identifying PCN reference is visible.

This GSV view is to the 'land' side of the marina and would tend to indicate the extent of ABP's interest:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.367778,-4...33;8i6656?hl=en

This sign also appears to be in ABP's colours, with the marina CP still ahead in the distance:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.3676076,-...33;8i6656?hl=en

I would also suggest that the high flint and stone wall is the boundary of the port area which supports my contention of non-relevant land.

Many thanks. The keeper has edited the images but it could take a few minutes to correct online.

The rest of it doesn't make a huge amount of sense to the keeper. The keeper is fairly simple individual with no real legal knowledge so please make allowance if the response isn't on the same level. Is the keeper reading right in that the PCN can't be enforced?

As written above, the keeper appealed the PCN this morning. It was worded as the Keeper and was an appeal for decency in the first instance. The keeper knows decency is usually lost in these situations but past experience with councils has proven that some people do have a heart.

The keeper appreciates the responses so far and would appreciate assistance for the next step should there be one.

This post has been edited by niacuk: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 - 21:02

[cabbyman]

Please post, verbatim, the appeal that was sent.

The next stage will be the rejection from Britannia along with a POPLA code........Although, from memory, Britannia often forget this bit!!!!

Search for 'maritime byelaws popla 2017,' 'ABP Southampton' and 'Town Quay Southampton' which should give you a good range of byelaws threads to read and understand. In a few of them, you will find some good POPLA appeals that mention the byelaws early on. Try adapting something to your situation and posting it here so that we can help you through it. However, don't expect us to do the work for you; it's imperative that you gain a good understanding of the process and legal concepts involved. It's quite straightforward once you get into it.

Spclexus and/or OP: I saw the CP entrance but didn't post the GSV link to it. However, there is a blue sign on the wall that mentions 'The Dock' or similar. Is that an ABP sign that contains a note about byelaws, by any chance? If so, it's in the perfect position for this case!

[Spclexus]

i can look friday unless the OP looks before

[niacuk]

i can look friday unless the OP looks before

Unlikely as the OP is 130 miles from the site.

[Spclexus]

i can look friday unless the OP looks before

Unlikely as the OP is 130 miles from the site.

Ah ok, ill see what info is on the signs and report back fri, no worries.