Newcastle Airport UKPPO, PCN after breach of airport byelaw |
Newcastle Airport UKPPO, PCN after breach of airport byelaw |
Mon, 10 Sep 2018 - 21:16
Post
#1
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 10 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,810 |
Hi All
I received a Parking Charge Notice out the blue a few weeks ago, sent to me as registered keeper of a car that was captured on CCTV making a drop off outside Newcastle Airport. The note came from a company called UK Parking Patrol Office and they're looking for £60 stating a breach of parking byelaw; it doesn't say in the letter but I think this is referring to a pdf here: https://www.newcastleairport.com/airport-byelaws I wasn't driving the car and had no idea it was in the airport area at the time of the incident. I'm going to challenge via the process on their website. From a bit of digging on these forums it looks like I'm not to go down the POPLA contract route as enforcement of byelaws is different (even though I'm sure I could outline a good case that the signage leading up to the supposed breach is inadequate plus all the other trimmings of the POPLA method). The main item of interest I've found is that it seems that I'm not automatically liable just because I'm registered keeper - despite their letter saying the opposite - so I'll simply tell them this in the challenge. I fully expect this will be rejected, and my backup plan is to rely on there only being a 6 month time limit on anyone being able to take court action against me. So I'll continue to respond to them, asking questions and dragging this out if possible. From what I understand UKPPO actually couldn't take legal action against me themselves, only the airport can do this. All of this is my understanding and could well be wrong. Does this seem a sensible approach? Has anyone any other strategies? Any advice would be appreciated, if there's interest I'll try to keep this post updated (including if I end up folding and paying...) Cheers |
|
|
Advertisement |
Mon, 10 Sep 2018 - 21:16
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 07:19
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
Lete's see the PCN, suitably redacted.
What was the alleged breach? |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 07:24
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,124 Joined: 8 Feb 2013 Member No.: 59,842 |
No POPLA for a UKPPO PCN - they are IPC operators.
|
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 07:46
Post
#4
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 10 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,810 |
Thanks both for the reply.
I don't have a copy of the letter with me just now, but I notice someone else has an almost identical letter that they've posted on the forum in the past here: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=at...st&id=51212 I'll upload mine when I can, but the wording looks the same. Obviously the images are different - the images in my letter are of the the car to which I am the registered keeper (or at least the same make and model as I can't see the number plate clearly) stopping outside a hotel and letting someone out. So the charge is 'parking in a prohibited area'. I'll be able to upload the image later, there's probably some case to be made about where red lines start/end and signage, but if possible I'll keep this simpler unless there is any benefit in gathering evidence now. I'm assuming that regardless of what I'll put into my challenge they'll reject it. Like I said in my post my main gripe (for now at least) is that I wasn't the driver and I don't think they should be able to simply state that I am responsible for a byelaw breach because I'm the RK. But maybe I'm wrong! @umkomaas - I see what you mean by POPLA not being relevant, presumably under IPC there are similar challenges that can be made over things like inappropriate signage etc. cheers |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 08:22
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,124 Joined: 8 Feb 2013 Member No.: 59,842 |
QUOTE @umkomaas - I see what you mean by POPLA not being relevant, presumably under IPC there are similar challenges that can be made over things like inappropriate signage etc. You can, but you will be rejected by them. They are all part of the IPC/Gladstones axis. They have promised their members that they will reject at least 80% of appeals (regardless of merit). We do not recommend appealing to the IAS unless you have an absolutely cast iron case, like the PPC saying your vehicle was parked at x location on y date when you can categorically prove you were touring in it in the South of France (for example). |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 08:25
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
So did the driver park in the entrance to the hotel, in front of the barrier?
|
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 08:48
Post
#7
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 10 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,810 |
@ostell that's correct, in front of the barrier as if going to drive through into the hotel, deciding not to go in and driving away (technically not 'parking' I guess - not sure what the definition is, but the picture shows someone getting out the car). It's one of those occasions where you would need to stop to read the sign to understand you're not supposed to stop....
|
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 09:05
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
If you look at the location on Google Street View I think that there are no signs, hatchings or warnings in that area. It's a bit of a honeypot for them.
Dropping off/Loading/Unloading are not parking. You can load unload on a double yellow line as that operation is not parking |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 09:32
Post
#9
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 10 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,810 |
I think this is the scene of the 'crime' in the attached picture - admittedly doesn't look good in the picture as there are double red lines and hatching's, and some small signs that are helpfully placed right on the roundabout as you enter the area. However the picture they sent me shows a vehicle stopped right in front of the barrier, where the red lines and hatching doesn't extend to. So it looks like the car pulled up to the barrier as if to enter the hotel, the barrier didn't lift, so the passenger jumped out and the car turned round. I'll raise this with the hotel too - this can't be an isolated incident - but guess I should respond to UKPPO in the meantime before their deadline runs out.
|
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 10:03
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 17,088 Joined: 8 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,457 |
That's a familiar picture !!!!
Ask what breach did the driver make as there are no signs nor road markings in the area. Just keep asking until the 6 months is up. This post has been edited by ostell: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 10:04 |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 10:04
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 31 May 2016 Member No.: 84,659 |
Comments from the regulars needed on this? Extrac from byelaws.
3.3.2.1 The Company, its servants and agents adhere to the British Parking Association's Code of Practice for the clamping of vehicles. UKPPO Ltd do not belong to the BPA since November 2015 I believe. Now in IPC "Terms and Conditions" means the terms and conditions of parking or stopping exhibited at the entrance to and at various locations within the Airport Car Parks and the Pick Up/Drop Off area. Does this location include the Hotel? 3.3.1.2 The PCN will also explain that unless payment is made in accordance with its terms, court action may be commenced to recover sum due from the registered keeper under the PCN together with costs, interest and any other sums legally recoverable; The byelaws refer to the RK is liable. This post has been edited by Panamajoe: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 10:07 |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 10:30
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 4,126 Joined: 31 Jan 2018 Member No.: 96,238 |
Section 6 of the byelaws says that they only apply to parts of the Airport where the Road Traffic Enactments don't apply
That means airside They don't apply to locations where drivers can pass freely |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 11:04
Post
#13
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 10 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,810 |
@ Redivi @Panamajoe Both of your points look correct and are what confuses me - probably purposefully so! The byelaws on the Airport website do indeed say in Section 3 that the RK is liable for most of what is listed in Section 6. However as Redivi says section 6 itself says they only apply:
"On any private Airport road or other part of the Airport to which the Road Traffic Enactments do not apply" How does a person know when they cross a boundary between what is an airport road and what isn't so what rules they fall under? The road in question has no obvious boundary - they appear further on as you go through barriers - and is indicated with double-red lines; does this mean it would be under RTA rather than a private road, and if so should this company even be attempting to claim this fee? That's assuming the land doesn't actually belong to the hotel, not the airport. |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 16:25
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 31 May 2016 Member No.: 84,659 |
This was a similar post I believe in the same place.
OP = ForNaturalJustice 10 Jul 2017 Post title was =UKPPO Parking Charge Notice - Legal basis far from clear, Newcastle Airport Bye-laws "enforcement" This post has been edited by Panamajoe: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 16:26 |
|
|
Tue, 11 Sep 2018 - 19:40
Post
#15
|
|
New Member Group: Members Posts: 6 Joined: 10 Sep 2018 Member No.: 99,810 |
@panamajoe Thanks for digging that thread out, looks like the same situation I'm in. The thread petered out in the end with no definitive update one way or the other, hopefully that means no comeback yet on that person!
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 12:25 |