Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: White Moss Car Park - "Park with Ease"
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
Pengy
Hi,

I'm writing this on behalf of my mum and dad who parked in the White Moss car park in Cumbria on 23rd Feb 2016. They thought on approaching the car park that it was free, but on entering saw that it wasn't and decided to park elsewhere. However, the signs said that the first 10 minutes of parking were free and therefore they decided to pop to the toilet while they were there.

They then received a letter dated 8th April which was a Parking Charge from “Park With Ease Ltd, Unit F2 The Court, Kestrel Road, Trafford Park, M17 1SF” for £50, reduced to £25 if paid within 14 days.

The parking period they give was 13.44:36 to 13:57:57 which is 13 minutes and 11 seconds.

Unfortunately, they have already responded to this letter before I got involved. They have appealed, basically stating that they are both elderly and that the toilet was further than they thought. Part of the letter was to confirm that my dad was the driver at the time, and they’ve signed to say that he was. They are both quite upset about this as they thought that they had got out of the car park within the 10 minutes free period but the ANPR system says otherwise.

I have included a picture (sorry about the poor quality) of the letter that Park With Ease have sent.

Please could you advise how we should proceed? Is it still the case that most of these companies just go away if you refuse to pay? If it went to court, would Park With Ease have to prove that the £50 was how much my mum and dad’s stay of 3 mins 11 seconds actually cost them and is not just a fine?





Many thanks in advance.
freddy1
so the burning question is m is the "grace period" being classed as the 10 mins free?


very much a question (by email) to the IPC , don't state the case , just ask the question

lets see their answer , or how the IPC can convert a free period to grace period

regulation has stated GRACE PERIOD time , not time included in payment times
unicorn47
15.2
Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.

From the IPC code of practice.

As your free 10 mins was a permitted period of parking then they must allow a grace period.

freddy1
slam dunk , tell them to do one

or go to the IPC , and see if there code of practice , is a fictitious document.

ask them the first question , when they reply with *****hit , quote their code of practice and ask them to sanction their member



oh look a flying pig!
ostell
And yet again no period of parking specified, only that dreadful "period of parking previous". Time was not parking time, it was time in the car park, some of it while you were moving.

Do either of your parents have a blue badge ?
Jlc
What a rubbish NtK. What is 'register keeper liability'? They aren't looking to invoke the conditions to pursue the keeper so why the heck is such a phrase on the form only to confuse. A signed statement of truth, jeez!

Have they actually rejected the appeal yet?
Pengy
Thanks very much for the replies. I will email the IPC and ask them about the grace period. Neither of my parents are blue badge holders. I will ask my parents to clarify exactly what it said on the signs about a free 10 minute period. They haven't heard back from their appeal letter yet. This all sounds very promising, thanks very much.
Pengy
I'm not sure how to word the question to the IPC about the grace period. Should I go into any details about this case at all e.g. mention the car park in question, or just ask generally about permitted periods and grace periods?
southpaw82
QUOTE (Jlc @ Sun, 17 Apr 2016 - 19:20) *
A signed statement of truth, jeez!

Wording lifted off an MG11 (criminal witness statement form). Worth a complaint to trading standards as it misrepresents the legal position.
freddy1
QUOTE (Pengy @ Sun, 17 Apr 2016 - 20:31) *
I'm not sure how to word the question to the IPC about the grace period. Should I go into any details about this case at all e.g. mention the car park in question, or just ask generally about permitted periods and grace periods?



firstly ask the IPC if the grace period is inclusive of the 10 min free period , do not mention your case at the moment
Jlc
Indeed, the 'prosecution' part is quite aggressive IMHO and possibly a misrepresentation of authority...

Unfortunately this lot are known to issue claims - expect a long haul.

Although £25 in itself is almost 'reasonable' for a genuine case.
southpaw82
QUOTE (Jlc @ Sun, 17 Apr 2016 - 20:41) *
Indeed, the 'prosecution' part is quite aggressive IMHO and possibly a misrepresentation of authority...

I'd say using the wording that brings the statement within the ambit of a prosecution for perjury (or would, if this wasn't a bullsh1t make believe statement) is a misleading practice.
freddy1
if a claim is passed to the IPC (owned by 2 solicitors) and a rebuttal is made by the IPC having been looked at by a team of "qualified" solicitors , would this not enable a charge to be brought against said "solicitors"
southpaw82
QUOTE (freddy1 @ Sun, 17 Apr 2016 - 20:48) *
if a claim is passed to the IPC (owned by 2 solicitors) and a rebuttal is made by the IPC having been looked at by a team of "qualified" solicitors , would this not enable a charge to be brought against said "solicitors"

For what?
freddy1
I was thinking to the SRA for continuance of acting on of a misrepresentation of authority based on and (checked by solicitors) A signed statement of truth,
southpaw82
QUOTE (freddy1 @ Sun, 17 Apr 2016 - 21:06) *
I was thinking to the SRA for continuance of acting on of a misrepresentation of authority based on and (checked by solicitors) A signed statement of truth,

I'm not intimately familiar with the SRA regulations but are they acting as solicitors when they "adjudicate" on these charges via the IPC (or whatever they're called today)? I'm not sure it falls within the SRA's ambit if they're not in the course of practising as solicitors.
freddy1
the IPC clearly state that they are freelance (adjudicators) solicitors hired but not employed by themselves , gladstones themselves clearly state on their letterheads/website that the are acting solicitors , and we even have a quote (twitter) by the BPA that Gladstone's are a company of solicitor's , not debt collectors , I don,t think that could be more clearer to the SRA


the IPC on their ever changing website state

We guarantee that your appeal will be considered by a completely independent and impartial adjudicator.

Whilst the Appeals system is administered by the IPC, each appeal is dealt with by a qualified and practising solicitor or barrister who will consider written representations from you and the Parking Operator before deciding whether the charge was lawfully issued.

Adjudicators are appointed under a contract of self-employment and it is an express term of their appointment that they must retain complete impartiality. They are not permitted to be influenced by the IPC and must not exercise any bias towards either the Parking Operator or the Motorist.


so having not been influenced by the IPC , they must check all paperwork for themselves , failure to spot a letter that purports to be a "legal" as in the sense of criminal is a failure of their actions

however obtaining the names of those "hidden" anonymous "barristas might be a problem , however gladstones as their employer could be held to rights
Pengy
I've just spoken to my mum and dad to clarify a few points. It turns out that they did not fill in the above form but sent a short email to the company asking them to reconsider their charge as the toilet was further than they had thought, and that they had thought that they had got back to the car in the allotted time anyway - basically appealing to their better nature. They gave their name and address in the email but did not stipulate who was driving.

My dad said that the parking sign stated : Up to ten minutes : No Charge, and then had the other charges set out below.

I've just found this in another thread from another forum -

"The Notice to Keeper (NTK) does not comply with the POFA 2012 or the IPC code of practice, which state that the NTK must be received by the keeper within 14 days beginning the day after the specified period of parking."

This seems to apply in my mum and dad's case - they parked on 23rd Feb and the NTK is dated 8th April - is this still applicable?
ostell
That's correct. No notice on the car then the notice to keeper has to be received within 14 days. There are other non compliance points on the NTK that would also reemove liability. Check paragraph 9 of POFA. Get one thing incorrect and there's no liability.

There is no statement about who the creditor is (I can't find it), it mentions that the creditor does not know the name of the driver but doesn't state who the creditor actually is.

There is no period of parking. There is time between the cameras but that was taken while the car was moving and was not therefore parked.


They may not be relying on keeper liability of POFA, they may be working on the reasonable (to them) assumption that the registered keeper was the driver. They jave to sjhow who was driving.
Jlc
They can only pursue the driver if they fail (or choose not to use) the conditions of the Protection of Freedoms Act.

They have the registered keeper details - there's no automatic get out as they will pursue the keeper under the presumption they were driving. If the keeper wasn't driver then this is a big advantage...
The Rookie
Fredd you are mixing up the directors acting as Gladstones, the IAS and the IPC very badly, when acting as directors of the IPC they are not acting as solicitors so the SRA won't give a monkeys.
freddy1
if the PPC wish to rely on POFa2012 and invoke keeper liability then a offence committed and captured by ANPR or other method of camera , or a "norris coles" writing a number down , must be RECIEVED by the victim within 14 days after the incident , whereas if a ticket was left on the car the PPC cannot (or should not) get details from the DVLA for 28 days and must deliver a letter to you by day 56

failure to comply with the above removes the ability to go by popla , and as such they can only pursue the driver

the driver(s) name should not be revealed
Pengy
Can they charge you for the time you've spent on their land, or just for the time that you were parked? If it's the time you were parked, the ANPR is always going to overestimate the time you were parked as it does not include the time spent finding a space etc. Is this what the 10 minute grace period is for - to give you time to park and then to leave the site? I'm just trying to get this clear in my head before I contact them.
freddy1
ok , read the IPC code of practice , a shortened version (comparing the IPC to the BPA states http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/20.../bpa-v-ipc.html Grace period before parking must be allowed and 5 minute grace period if ticket expires , as the "ticket" is the free period , QED

read the full version here http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j...mFTvrDtZb2cDwaw
Pengy
Thanks again Freddy1, I can't find anywhere where it states how long the grace period actually is for the IPC. It just states that a "sufficient amount of time" to park, read signs and to leave the site, I think the 5 minutes was for the BPA. I'll ask the IPC though what they define as a "sufficient amount of time". I would have thought that it would be easy to defend the 3mins 11 seconds in time taken to park and the leave the site though in any case.

freddy1
that info "sufficient time" is well hidden , but follows council rules (10 mins) , when challenged the BPA state that the operator is supposed to tell them of grace periods , but they are not at liberty to tell you what they are (?)

with a BPA "crime" simply showing your case and their statement results in a cancelation

please look at a PPC being ridiculed in court (last week) by a judge http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/20...es-lack-of.html


IPC cases are a different matter , you could even email the IPC asking if PWE offer a grace period on this site that meets the IPC code of practice , and hint that you would like to know what it is , do not expect a sensible answer , however their answer and a printout of the COP , would look bad to them (pwe) in court if it went that far
ostell
Put up your appeal here for critique before you send. Unless the original appeal revealed exactly who was driving then also add in the fact that the notice was received too late to hold the keeper liable. Plus other items missing.
Pengy
Well, good news here. My mum and dad got this today...

Thank you for your email.

We can confirm that this has been cancelled, we apologise for any inconvenience that has been caused.

Kind Regards

Park With Ease

Tbh, I'm amazed that they cancelled the charge - I thought that there would be more of a fight than that!

I did email the IPC and ask about the grace period but they as yet haven't replied. I put my name on the email, and our surname isn't exactly common. I regretted doing this afterwards because I was wondering if they could match up my question with the appeal but probably not.

Thanks very much for everyone's help, this is such a great forum!

Damian
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.