Tariff not clear |
Tariff not clear |
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:00
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 2 Feb 2023 Member No.: 119,036 |
If someone looked at the pictured board and concluded that Sunday parking is free and then received a PCN, can they succcessfully argue to POPLA and in court that the sign is not clear? Thank you!
|
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:00
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:05
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 11 Joined: 2 Feb 2023 Member No.: 119,034 |
Literally says Sunday £2 lol
|
|
|
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:06
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,322 Joined: 18 Aug 2016 From: Manchester Member No.: 86,486 |
Seems clear enough to me, Sunday is £2 per visit, plus all daily tariffs expire at midnight
No mention of the word. FREE This post has been edited by Redx: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:07 |
|
|
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:14
Post
#4
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 2 Feb 2023 Member No.: 119,036 |
I mean if I wanted it to be clear I would have placed the Sunday tariff right after the Monday to Saturday and would not have buried it after the van tariff and which buttons to press, but I guess that's I'm asking too much here. Should have gone to specsavers
|
|
|
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:19
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 41,503 Joined: 25 Aug 2011 From: Planet Earth Member No.: 49,223 |
I mean if I wanted it to be clear I would have placed the Sunday tariff right after the Monday to Saturday and would not have buried it after the van tariff and which buttons to press, but I guess that's I'm asking too much here. I agree but I don't think it's going to hold any weight…. It's not best placed but it's not hidden. -------------------- 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. |
|
|
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:21
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,235 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
If someone looked at the pictured board and concluded that Sunday parking is free and then received a PCN, can they succcessfully argue to POPLA and in court that the sign is not clear? Thank you! 1. I would hope that "someone" was a passenger and not a driver coz if someone didn't see the Sunday and bank Holiday £2 per visit in capitals maybe their eyesight is impaired and they shouldn't be driving. 2. arguing the sign isn't clear would result in someone looking extremely silly at the tribunal 3. if someone thought popla was a court they would look silly again Good job your question is only theoretical This post has been edited by mickR: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:22 |
|
|
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:23
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,322 Joined: 18 Aug 2016 From: Manchester Member No.: 86,486 |
I cannot see Green parking agreeing, nor popla, nor a court, although you may be right, but nowhere does it offer free parking and it's pay and display on the 6 days in the top half, so for a Sunday it paid to pay more attention to the rest of it, looking for the keyword Sunday. ( I went to Specsavers last year. .)
This post has been edited by Redx: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 - 22:25 |
|
|
Fri, 3 Feb 2023 - 09:00
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
If someone looked at the pictured board and concluded that Sunday parking is free and then received a PCN, can they succcessfully argue to POPLA and in court that the sign is not clear? Thank you! OP, this is not how the forum works. If there is a PCN then pl post omitting only personal info, the wording of a sign(see below) is only one part of our analysis. Sign Signs are placed in pairs: one at the entrance to the private property and others within. The former puts drivers on notice that controls exist and that they should look for further detailed signs for Ts and Cs, the latter, as you've posted, sets out the detail. But you don't get to the second without the first. So, we need to see the entrance signs because if there is an argument to be made regarding ambiguity, this is where it starts. |
|
|
Fri, 3 Feb 2023 - 09:28
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,235 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
this should be in the flame pit as its not a live case
But you don't get to the second without the first. So, we need to see the entrance signs because if there is an argument to be made regarding ambiguity, this is where it starts. while I agree in most cases that would be correct in this instance I don't think there can be any ambiguity, the sign is very clear img but you never know, the entrance sign might just say "hello free parking on a Sunday" come on in. |
|
|
Fri, 3 Feb 2023 - 21:27
Post
#10
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 2 Feb 2023 Member No.: 119,036 |
Thank you all for the replies. The entrance sign says "Charges apply at all times".
Here's the live case with some more ambiguity. A family arrived at this relatively new car park which was set up in place of a demolished building across the road from the train station. While everyone was preparing to walk, the driver went to see the tariffs board and launched RingGo app as they usually do it that town. The RingGo app, instead of the usual "How would you like to pay" was asking "When do you want your parking session to start?" and added "A parking space is not guaranteed". While the driver was scratching their head confused by this and double checking that RingGo has the same car park as where they are located, another chap approached and started looking at the tariff board. He then concluded loudly that Sunday is free. The driver had a glance at the board, did not immediately see the Sunday, because it's not located together with other days, so the chap's idea seemed credible and also explained the RingGo confusion. A bunch of car parks in town are free on Sundays, so it's not unusual. So both were quickly on their way without paying and that was the end of it, until the keeper received the PCN. My feeling is that the driver did good to comply (although not their absolute best) but ulimately navigated the confusing inputs in wrong direction. I think it's unfair that the driver should pay £85 reduced to £40, but if community thinks it a fair play, the keeper won't fight it. The PCN: https://ibb.co/B4FygPx https://ibb.co/k3k8fkT |
|
|
Sat, 4 Feb 2023 - 12:50
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 234 Joined: 18 Jun 2014 From: Cheshire Member No.: 71,339 |
My feeling is that the driver did good to comply (although not their absolute best) but ulimately navigated the confusing inputs in wrong direction. I think it's unfair that the driver should pay £85 reduced to £40, but if community thinks it a fair play, the keeper won't fight it. The PCN: https://ibb.co/B4FygPx https://ibb.co/k3k8fkT I don't think "the community" is making any comment on fairness here, but on the other hand the consensus - with which I agree - is that the tariff for parking on a Sunday was clear enough, and that you ought to have paid £2 at the time of parking. P.S. The PCN you posted is only the rear of the PCN I think. This post has been edited by jfollows: Sat, 4 Feb 2023 - 12:55 |
|
|
Sat, 4 Feb 2023 - 17:10
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 35,055 Joined: 2 Aug 2008 From: Woking Member No.: 21,551 |
The entrance sign says "Charges apply at all times".
What part of 'at all times' didn't the driver understand? The 'inputs', which are the sign 'at all times' plus the detailed tariff board, would be found to be clear by any assessor or court therefore IMO the creditor has the right to recover the parking charge from the driver. But whether they can hold the keeper liable is another matter and relates to the PCN Notice to Keeper(presumably) or alternatively the PCN Notice to Hirer. I can't see as neither link loads for me. |
|
|
Sat, 4 Feb 2023 - 17:55
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 7,235 Joined: 5 Jan 2007 From: England Member No.: 9,919 |
no the links don't work.
as HCA says, PCN was it on vehicle? sent in post? has anyone responded to it yet? if so what was sent? you should have read the "before you post" sticky and posted all the relevant information required from. the start and not just ..as you go... |
|
|
Sun, 5 Feb 2023 - 20:29
Post
#14
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 2 Feb 2023 Member No.: 119,036 |
Apologies for the lack of info. The PCN to keeper was received by post and not answered yet. The links are working again: https://ibb.co/B4FygPx https://ibb.co/k3k8fkT
|
|
|
Mon, 6 Feb 2023 - 08:21
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 889 Joined: 22 Jan 2022 Member No.: 115,469 |
I agree with all those who have said that the signage clearly shows that Sunday parking is charged at £2 and is not free. This still leaves scope for a couple of arguments to deploy in the initial appeal to the parking operator (which will be rejected, but open the door to an appeal to POPLA).
1. The notice is not effective to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper because it does not include an invitation to the keeper to pay the charge as required by paragraph 9.(2)(e)(i) of the Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (commonly known as "POFA"). 2. While the Sunday tariff is clearly displayed, the £85 parking charge is not. If this is the case, POPLA should allow the appeal for two reasons: (a) if the charge isn't clearly displayed, it doesn't form part of the operator's contract with the driver, so there's no liability to transfer to the keeper; and (b) inadequate signage is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice, and POPLA assessors are often willing to cancel PCNs where there's a Code breach by the operator. In relation to point 1, POPLA assessors are not always up to snuff when it comes to understanding the intricacies of POFA, so this isn't a slam dunk at POPLA. However, losing at POPLA is not disastrous because POPLA decisions are not binding on motorists and the operator would need to sue the keeper in the County Court to enforce the charge. County Court judges are better equipped to understand legal technicalities than POPA assessors, which doesn't mean that the judge in any particular case will accept the 9.(2)(e)(i) argument. In relation to point 2, while it is not a slam dunk, I have won a case at POPLA where the assessor ruled the signage as inadequate to convey the parking charge because the wording was too small: POPLA Assessor Andy Prescott (20 April 2022): “‘I reviewed the signs in this case and must note the reference to a: “£80” PCN is written in a much smaller font than the conditions that precede it, particularly the requirement to pay £5 per visit which is significantly more prominent…. I conclude the charge is not sufficiently brought to the attention of motorists.” (POPLA Reference 0490392173)" Of course, we've only seen the entrance sign. If the £85 parking charge is clearly displayed in big letters on the signs inside the car park, that would undermine the argument This post has been edited by Nosy Parker: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 - 08:23 |
|
|
Mon, 6 Feb 2023 - 09:14
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,363 Joined: 9 Apr 2021 Member No.: 112,205 |
That the parking charge isn't clearly displayed might be a risky one... Its in a slightly smaller and less prominent font than the tariffs, granted, but not massively so. Its a fairly big sign to start with, and nearly a quarter is taken up by details of parking charges and situations in which one will be issued.
As Nosy Parker says it'd be worth seeing the other signs around the car park too. -------------------- Useful Links (for private parking charges):
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4 | British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice | International Parking Community (IPC) Code of Practice |
|
|
Mon, 6 Feb 2023 - 10:22
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 889 Joined: 22 Jan 2022 Member No.: 115,469 |
Thanks, DWMB2. What are your thoughts on the lack of the mandatory invitation to pay?
As regards the signage point being "risky", the only risk at this stage is loss of the discount which can be preserved by appealing within the 14 day window. Agreed re the other signage. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 13:20 |