PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Torquay Marina - That old chestnut, Maybe a new way to be stupid though? :)
MyNameIsNotImpor...
post Mon, 18 Oct 2021 - 14:44
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 18 Oct 2021
Member No.: 114,436



Afternoon all,
I've only discovered these forums today but have done some searching and seen a lot of results featuring the infamous Torquay Marina car park.
I've had the misfortune to arrive back from my holiday to a PCN from them.

I believe I understand where the drivers mistake happened now after a reddit thread but they drove up to the site and saw the big signs saying "Pay on exit" fine, work it out when they get back to the car. Got back to the car and realised there was no barrier and they'd not been given a ticket when they got onto site (I've not seen ones like that in any other car park so far but then I've barely been out in the last 18 months heh)

When the driver got back to the car they saw people paying so figured they'd better do the same, ringgo app (That they'd used all around the county) pick up a session for the duration they think they've been there (they can only guess at this point as they didn't think it was their responsibility to note it down?) Think they've done the right thing but it feels weird as they've got a session now that they've just left early.

Get back home to a PCN from Premier Park. DOH!
OK So it seems that if they had got back to my car and used the physical machine then it'd have known when they entered and charged them appropriately?
Their mistake was using the supported app which works in a different way but not mentioned on the BIG signs as they enter but they did see one only after exiting the site by the road that mentioned if paying by mobile then pay on arrival (they didn't see it until after they left the car park as it was on the car exit not the pedestrian one used to leave the car park in the first place) They imagine if they looked around they might've found others but they'd got the big instructions in my head.


Google Streetview of signs they saw

I now see where the driver went wrong but feel frustrated and misled by the signs going in, is it worth pursing this or do I just pay it as an ignorance fee?

This post has been edited by MyNameIsNotImportant: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 - 15:19
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 22)
Advertisement
post Mon, 18 Oct 2021 - 14:44
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
MyNameIsNotImpor...
post Mon, 25 Oct 2021 - 07:57
Post #21


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8
Joined: 18 Oct 2021
Member No.: 114,436



QUOTE (ostell @ Sun, 24 Oct 2021 - 15:05) *
Have a look at other Torquay marina threads and see what happened there

I did try that but the search seems weirdly limited. I couldn't get a decent result before submitting my own. It's the "google enhanced" one which seems to show no other details (like post time etc) and says yep, there's around 111 results, here's the first 7 (and won't show me any more??)

I opened all of those first 7 at least but they're all related to 2016 (well one is 2014) so not really helpful as there was an issue with their signage at the time it seems.

I know I must be doing something wrong but I can't find the built in board search and the google one seems broken?

This post has been edited by MyNameIsNotImportant: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 - 07:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dramaqueen
post Tue, 2 Nov 2021 - 14:49
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 333
Joined: 1 Jul 2014
From: east sussex
Member No.: 71,587



The Notice to Keeper does not comply with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, sched 4, paragraph 9. So there is no keeper liability in any event, byelaws or no byelaws. You have 28 days from receipt of the Notice to appeal to Premier Park. Still time, then, to send them a letter along the lines drafted by Ostell in other threads:

"Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper xxxxx for vehicle VRM xxxx

You have failed to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to give notice of keeper liability as prescribed by section 9 (2) (f) of the Act. You have also failed to give the invitation to keeper as prescribed by 9 (2) (e) of the same act

You cannot, therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the time to me, the keeper.

There is no legal requirement to name the driver at the time and I will not be doing so.

I do not expect to hear from you again, or your debt collectors, except to confirm that no further action will be taken on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records.

Yours etc


Obviously, don't fall for their demand on the back of the NTK that all communications must contain the name and address of the driver.

This initial appeal will be rejected, but then you can appeal to POPLA where you should win. See this POPLA result posted on MSE yesterday, on this thread: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discus...ecisions#latest . The wording on the Notice to Keeper was the same as yours.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 2 Nov 2021 - 16:34
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,628
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



They given 9 (2) (f) even if slightly rearranged.

This post has been edited by ostell: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 - 16:37
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: Sunday, 28th November 2021 - 08:52
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.