Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wing Parking PCN in Islington
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
Pages: 1, 2
BlanketyBlank
Hi,

I live on a large council estate in Islington. There is an unallocated single bay outside our block of 15 flats. It is used by council contractors and residents when loading/unloading generally.

The driver parked there on the weekend as they had to load a small sofa into the car. Whilst grappling with getting the sofa out of the hallway, the driver was given a ticket. A neighbour on the ground floor said he had seen a guy who looked like a parking attendant on a moped around 75 metres away looking in the direction of my car. Clearly the moped was watching the vehicle but wouldn't have been able to see the whole vehicle, just the front bonnet.

The driver parked there for genuine reasons and residents park there all the time for similarly genuine reasons without penalty.

The driver spotted the no parking sign afterwards and have to say the font is very small and also I don't think that the signs are close enough to this particular bay to be relevant - I always thought they were relating to the double yellow lines on the road that runs through the estate.

The PCN reckons that the car was observed for around 12 minutes - however because of where they were observing from, they wouldn't have seen the driver and partner hefting a large sofa down the block towards the car. Not sure if that point is even relevant.


Hoping someone can assist. I've attached some photos to demonstrate what I fail to explain properly in words!

Many thanks
BlanketyBlank
cp8759
The area where you parked is part of the highway and subject to double yellow lines, so the private parking sign is irrelevant. You are entitled to park the car where you did for the purposes of loading and unloading, and the picture of the sofa is rather compelling evidence.

But let's start with the basics, upload pictures of the PCN (both sides in full) and the council photos (which you'll find on the council website), you'll run out of space on here so put them on imgur.com or similar.
Neil B
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 29 Jul 2019 - 17:01) *
upload pictures of the PCN (both sides in full)

Has she got one? I don't think council but Wing.
Mad Mick V
Needs to be moved to the private parking side of the house.


Wing Parking does not issue PCNs.


Mick
cp8759
BlanketyBlank you need to show us the PCN.
BlanketyBlank
Thanks everyone. I've attached photos of the PCN front & back. Looks like in this case Islington Council have subcontracted Wing Parking. This is not a residential street, its in the middle of a council estate so council housing land, not Highways.
Incandescent
That is a private parking charge notice, it is not a "Penalty Charge Notice" (aka PCN) issued by a council under the Traffic Management Act.
BlanketyBlank
Some photos attached from Wings website which you are directed to via Islington Councils website.
ManxRed
Could you post up the image of the sign so we can see the wording? It looks a long way from the car in the photo.

Can you edit all your posts so as not to imply who was driving? Simply refer to the driver as The Driver. Are you the Registered Keeper?

Four things:

- The sign looks well hidden from the spot where the driver parked. Arguably no contract formed if its not prominently displayed
- The Notice to Driver doesn't look like it's trying to invoke the Protection of Freedoms Act (there may well be a Council Parking Places Order on the location, or some other traffic legislation applies, making it 'not relevant land' for the purposes of the act). This effectively means that they cannot transfer liability for the charge onto the Keeper of the vehicle and are restricted to pursuing the driver only. You mustn't give them any clues or information as to who that was.
- Not displaying a permit implies that the signs may be forbidding in nature (e.g. Permit Holders Only) and hence are not offering a contract to a non-permit holder. No contract = no breach = no charge.
- Google Homeguard v Jopson for a case regarding loading/unloading with some very useful points.
cp8759
I would add that the area in question is part of the highway and parking controls fall under the Traffic Management Act, the council should have issued a statutory penalty charge notice in these circumstances. I don't see how a private parking charge notice can be valid in the area of land in question is part of a public highway.
BlanketyBlank
Thanks for the comments. I have made some changes as suggested. I am the registered keeper.

There is a photo of the signage right at the top of the thread.

My take on highways etc is that this is a road which runs right through the middle of the council estate - if the road hasn't been adopted by Highways, then it remains council land and therefore the council are entitled to employ Wing as agents..

We get loads of Islington council traffic wardens in our area but they never patrol on the actual estate, including this road in question.

The appeals process for the ticket is an odd one, stage 1 is Wing, stage 2 goes back to the Council, stage 3 is POPLA.
The Rookie
Perfect, you can't have entered a contract with them to park and pay £100 as you do not have a permit (it says) and it is for permit parking only.

The Notice to driver isn't compliant to make the keeper liable to the subsequent NtK and Wing's Notice to Keeper when it comes almost certainly won't be compliant either.

Standard advice is to appeal such that it arrives on day 26 after the parking event, appeal as KEEPER, make a small change in address from that on your V5c registration document (add an e, or insert a district not on the V5c) so if they issue an NtK you know if they used the appeal address or the one from DVLA. (not getting details from DVLA is another PoFA failing).

You only need a simple appeal along the lines of public highway, no keeper liability and restrictive and non visible signage, post it here for critique BEFORE you send it.
BlanketyBlank
Thanks for the advice. So on day 26, I'll reply back with:
Dear Wing,
I reject the charge notice 'eg123XYZ"£' for the following reasons:
1) The vehicle was parked on private land, this is not a highways road.
2) The driver has not entered into a contract with Wing Parking Ltd or Islington Council
3) The yellow signage is too far away from the car in the photographs taken by your agent to be relevant
4) The same said sign is placed too high to read properly, particularly as the font size is far too small to make out, especially whilst driving.


Grateful for any comments/amendments to this first draft.
The Rookie
Your point one is the wrong way round!

You need to elaborate each point a little, point 2 stems for 3 and 4 so isn't a separate appeal point and you've not included forbidding signage.
BlanketyBlank
I think there's some confusion on point 1. I don't think this has anything to do with Highways. Its a private 'council-housing-land' road running through the estate and its not patrolled by regular traffic wardens.
ostell
QUOTE (BlanketyBlank @ Tue, 30 Jul 2019 - 12:47) *
I think there's some confusion on point 1. I don't think this has anything to do with Highways. Its a private 'council-housing-land' road running through the estate and its not patrolled by regular traffic wardens.

Have you actually checked the status of the road with the local council.
ManxRed
No, the whole point is that the road is publicly accessible. Therefore they SHOULD have issued a council PENALTY Charge Notice.

Instead, they've issued a private company's PARKING Charge Notice, which is only applicable to private land.

By stating that you were parked on a public highway, you're scuppering their issue of a private land charge.

Maybe worth checking with the council as to whether they maintain the road or not. Forget who normally 'patrols' it. That's irrelevant.
BlanketyBlank
ok - just checked with the council - "the road is split between highways and the council estate. If you got a ticket from Wing, it would be the estate bit. If you got a ticket from a normal traffic warden, it would be the highways section."

So I think I have to take it that the piece of land in question is definitely not highways.
ManxRed
I give up!
The Rookie
QUOTE (BlanketyBlank @ Tue, 30 Jul 2019 - 15:42) *
ok - just checked with the council - "the road is split between highways and the council estate. If you got a ticket from Wing, it would be the estate bit. If you got a ticket from a normal traffic warden, it would be the highways section."

So I think I have to take it that the piece of land in question is definitely not highways.

NO...... wing have history of ticketing where they shouldn't, make them work for it.
BlanketyBlank
Also not sure if this is relevant but the car is not parked on the road itself, its in a bay offset from the road.
cp8759
QUOTE (BlanketyBlank @ Tue, 30 Jul 2019 - 15:42) *
ok - just checked with the council - "the road is split between highways and the council estate. If you got a ticket from Wing, it would be the estate bit. If you got a ticket from a normal traffic warden, it would be the highways section."

So I think I have to take it that the piece of land in question is definitely not highways.

The people who work for the council are not legally trained and while they're no doubt trying to be helpful, the information they've provided is incorrect. The area where you parked is part of the highway as a matter of law, and I'm telling you as a fact that if a Penalty Charge Notice had been issued, you would not be able to challenge it on the basis that the land is not a highway. This has been confirmed by the Court of Appeal, see Dawood, R (on the application of) v The Parking Adjudicator & Anor [2009] EWCA Civ 1411 https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/1411.html

Whether the land in question is maintained by the council's highways team, the council's estates team, my cousin, or Father Christmas, makes not one iota of difference.
BlanketyBlank
Thanks for that. So my second attempt looks like this:

Dear Wing,

I reject the charge notice 'eg123XYZ"£' for the following reasons:

1) The area the vehicle is parked on is actually Highways land therefore you have no legal right to be operating on this road.

2) I would remind you that the driver has not entered into a contract with Wing Parking Ltd or Islington Council therefore the signage is not relevant. In any case, the signage is not forbidding, it is nowhere near the actual spot that the car was parked and the font size is far too small to be read from a moving vehicle.

Please confirm in writing that the charge notice has been cancelled.

Kind regards...
The Rookie
1/ Not highways land, just highway.....

2/ How can you remind them of something you've not told them yet, or explained why?

I do hope your reading other threads to help you, but fear not.
BlanketyBlank
Thanks - reading lots of other threads but I'm wary of adding in points of defence that might not be legally applicable to this particular set of circumstances.
Here goes for my latest draft - would really welcome any further assistance or links to relevant threads that I may have missed. I know its quite brief but is there any benefit in making it longer if those two points capture the basis of my defence?

Dear Wing,

I reject the charge notice 'eg123XYZ"£' for the following reasons:

1) The area the vehicle is parked on is Highways land. Therefore you have no legal right to be operating in this area.

2) The driver has not entered into a contract with Wing Parking Ltd or Islington Council therefore the signage is not relevant. In any case, the signage is not forbidding, it is nowhere near the actual spot that the car was parked and the font size is far too small to be read from a moving vehicle.

Please confirm in writing that the charge notice has been cancelled.

Kind regards...

cp8759
I'd suggest the following:

QUOTE (BlanketyBlank @ Mon, 5 Aug 2019 - 13:43) *
Dear Wing,

Liability for charge notice 'eg123XYZ"£' is denied for the following reasons:

1) The area the vehicle is parked on a public highways land. Therefore you have no legal right to be operating in this area, this area is subject to statutory enforcement by the council under the Traffic Management Act 2004. Any enforcement would be by means of a Penalty Charge Notice and Wing Parking Ltd has no standing in the matter.

2) The driver has not entered into a contract with Wing Parking Ltd or Islington Council therefore the signage is not relevant. In any case, the signage is not forbidding, it is nowhere near the actual spot that the car was parked and the font size is far too small to be read from a moving vehicle.

Please confirm in writing that the charge notice has been cancelled.

Kind regards...

nosferatu1001
I wouldnt, theres a few typos there!

1) The area the vehicle is parked on is land accessible to the public, and is therefore "highway" under the definition given in the TMA2004. Wing Parking cannot have any standing to be operating in this area regardldess of any contract you may have with the highways authority, and this area is subject onlyt to statutory enforcement by the council under the Traffic Management Act 2004. Any enforcement can only be by means of a Penalty Charge Notice and Wing Parking Ltd has no standing in the matter.

2) The driver has not entered into a contract with Wing Parking Ltd or Islington Council therefore the signage is not relevant. In any case, the signage is forbidding to non=permit holders, and so no alleged contract can ever be formed, it is nowhere near the actual spot that the car was parked and the font size is far too small to be read from a moving vehicle.
BlanketyBlank
That's really helpful both of you.

I feel confident I've got a strong case to appeal with. I'll be leaving things now until Day 26 and then will put my appeal in and post an update when I have it.

Thanks again.
BlanketyBlank
Quick update:
I appealed on day 26. Apart from the following auto-acknowledgement I received immediately, I haven't heard anything from Wing despite their aim of a 14 day turnaround. I've checked my spam folder regularly and nothing. Do you think I should call them or just sit tight?

Thank you for submitting your appeal.
As your appeal has been submitted online, we will reply by email, even if you have included a postal address. We aim to issue a full response within 28 days (14 days for London Borough of Islington cases) and therefore please allow this full period before enquiring further as to the status of your appeal. If you have not received a full reply within those times, please check your spam or junk mail folders before contacting us in order to ensure our reply has not been misfiled by your email system.
We do reply to every appeal and therefore if you do not receive a reply within 28 days, you MUST NOT assume that your case has been dealt with, or that it has been decided in your favour, you MUST contact us to enquire about the status of your appeal. Unless you have written confirmation otherwise, you must assume that the parking charge notice is still outstanding and that we may pursue payment through our debt recovery agents and as such you MUST ensure you chase a reply to your appeal and not leave the matter pending for several weeks or months. If we have sent you a reply by email, that reply will be considered to have been delivered to you and we will not consider later claims that it was not received or that it was in your junk or spam folders, or that you experienced email problems.
Please DO NOT reply to this email address as you will not receive a reply.
Redivi
You're under no obligation to check anything

The British Parking Association Code of Practice says that, unless there's a good reason, Wing must make a decision within 35 days

The original version said that, if it wasn't rejected within 35 days, it was deemed accepted

I would therefore wait until after Day 35 and tell them they're in breach of the Code of Practice
Wing will at that point have to either deal with the appeal immediately or tell you that they've already rejected it

If they've rejected it, you're still in time to use the access code for the second appeal to POPLA
(Or do Wing still have a three-stage appeal with the second appeal to the council) ?
nosferatu1001
Id just sit tight, until you get past the point where they can send you an NtK.
BlanketyBlank
Hi,
Wing have responded and rejected the appeal which is attached.
As suggested I slightly amended the spelling of my name when I appealed and their response has also adopted the incorrect spelling. Hopefully this is a good thing?
I would welcome comments on next steps please?
Many thanks
nosferatu1001
Well you shioujld know *why* - it implies they havent accessed the DVLA yet.

If they are past 56 days, then theyre too late.

You know the next steps! Every wing parking thread follows the same rules...
BlanketyBlank
Thanks for the quick reply. Its been 44 days so far. If it gets past 56 days and I haven't heard anything further from them, on the basis that they have used the incorrect spelling of my name, can I assume it is safe to wait for the Notice to owner?
nosferatu1001
Notice to Keeper.
No, you have to follow their appeals process
Again, every WING thread has this. You appeal a second time, THEN you get a POPLA code where the lack of NtK means the keeper wins.

Pelase say youve found other threads?
ostell
You MUST wait till day 56
BlanketyBlank
Hi, thank-you for your responses.

I have found other threads but not for cases where Wing deal with stage 1, then subsequent appeals are passed back to the local authority. I'm not very adept at using the search function.

I have 14 days to appeal to the local authority however I have a few questions that I'm unsure on.

1) The 56 days is up before the 14 days 2nd appeal deadline is up. Should I keep my 2nd appeal on ice until after the 56 days point?

2) Should I continue to mis-spell my name in my 2nd appeal to the local authority? I'm a leaseholder so they will know my correct details.

3) Are the grounds of the appeal the same as I used in my 1st appeal, ie that the area in question is highways and also the forbidding signage point?

Thanks again for all suggestions and advice.
nosferatu1001
1) No, you appeal within the deadlines, otherwiwe they reject the appeal and you lose the chance to go to POPLA
2) Yes, and youre assuming theyve got two braincells to rub together
3) Yes, and that therefore you as Keeper have NO liability in this matter.
Redivi
Weren't there complaints to the BPA about Wing's three stage appeal system with its very short interval to submit an appeal to the council or lose the chance of a POPLA appeal ?
BlanketyBlank
2nd appeal to the Council on 13th Sept. Auto acknowledgement said they would reply in 10 working days. That's passed now, still heard nothing.
BlanketyBlank
Hi,

Having never received a response from Islington Council to my 2nd stage appeal and 6 months later, I've just received the attached letter from ZZPS Limited in yesterday's post.

The name they have used is incorrectly spelt, as a result of me having spelt my name incorrectly in my original appeal.

I would be grateful for advice on whether to respond to this company directly.

Many thanks

BlanketyBlank
nosferatu1001
Of course you dont talk to ZZPS. Impossible to find any advice saying otherwise here....debt collectors are ignored

What happened when you chased up the lack of response?
BlanketyBlank
Thanks Nosferatu. I didn't chase Islington Council for the simple reason that I figured if they neglected to respond to me that it would work in my favour. Should I just sit on my hands for now then would you suggest?
nosferatu1001
Of course it doesnt "work in your favour". because now youve lost access to POPLA.
Youre at the ignore but file paperwork.
BlanketyBlank
Apologies for my ignorance - when you say ignore but file paperwork, do you mean I have to file paperwork with the council? Or just keep a record of everything received (which I have been doing)?
ManxRed
Just keep it somewhere safe.
nosferatu1001
Dont throw paperwork away.
BlanketyBlank
Click to view attachment


Just received the attached from QDR Solicitors. Should I just ignore and add to the file?
Nb. they also spelt my name incorrectly on the letter as per the previous letter from ZZPS.
Thanks
ManxRed
QUOTE (BlanketyBlank @ Fri, 21 Feb 2020 - 12:43) *
Nb. they also spelt my name incorrectly on the letter as per the previous letter from ZZPS.
Thanks


There's a good reason for that!

ZZPS cannot instruct a solicitor to act, they are a third party to any claim.

I suspect this might be ZZPS pretending to be QDR but maybe others can confirm.
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.