Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Britannia Parking - Silver Street - Wrong Reg
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
timbuktumaster
Driver parked my vehicle in parking space and mistakenly put the numberplate of their own vehicle into the ticket machine. They didn't realise their mistake until they went back to put more time on the parking. They then put in the correct number plate for the latter half of the parking.

Received a ticket through the post a couple of weeks later - the carpark controlled by ANPR

Driver has a copy of the ticket purchased with the wrong numberplate on.

Is it worth appealing to Britannia Parking on the grounds that the driver had bought a ticket? Or will this be rejected outright.

Jlc
And the reverse? (Seems a dead easy non-PoFA win...)
timbuktumaster
Jlc
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 the invitation to keeper in the format prescribed by section 9 (2) (e) of the 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
timbuktumaster
Thanks so much
timbuktumaster
QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 3 Aug 2019 - 12:18) *
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 the invitation to keeper in the format prescribed by section 9 (2) (e) of the 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


Sorry, I'm just checking before I send this, Is this not covered by the "transfer of liability" section on the back of the parking notice they sent me?
Jlc
You can name the driver if you wish. (Clue, don’t and win as the keeper as they have not complied with POFA)

The driver is the only person that can form the alleged contact. They can pursue the keeper for the driver’s unpaid parking change only if they comply. They don’t...
timbuktumaster
QUOTE (Jlc @ Sat, 3 Aug 2019 - 16:07) *
You can name the driver if you wish. (Clue, don’t and win as the keeper as they have not complied with POFA)

The driver is the only person that can form the alleged contact. They can pursue the keeper for the driver’s unpaid parking change only if they comply. They don’t...



Yes I get that, but 9 2 e says
state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

Have they not fulfilled this requirement with the liability form and if not, why not?
ostell
9 (2) starts with "must" then continues in (e) "state that" Where is that wording?

You may care to go with "failed to issue the warning of keeper as prescribed by 9 (2) (f)"

The object is to get a POPLA code and then throw all the POFA fails into that appeal
timbuktumaster
OK great thanks so much
timbuktumaster
This is the letter I sent to Britannia Parking and the reply I received, could anyone advise me as to my appeal to Popla in response to their reply? They say it is their choice whether or not to refer to Keeper LIability Provisions in schedule 4 of POFA and not doing so does not invalidate the ticket
Many thanks

Dear Sirs,

I have just received your Notice to Keeper ++++++++ for vehicle VRM +++++++++

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 the invitation to keeper in the format prescribed by section 9 (2) (e) of the 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 Faithfully

And here is their reply

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/2896/nnfRgr.jpg

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img921/6964/hG7dva.jpg




nosferatu1001
They are correct
It doesnt make their INVOICE invalid. WHy would it?
it just means the Keeper isnt liable

So your POPLA appeal must be nearly ready - rejection was expected, as 5 moinutes research her tells you - with "no keeper liability" being point one. You point out in their rejction they confirm no POFA reliance, so the appeal MUST be upheld.
timbuktumaster
Is this adequate for Popla appeal? SHould I also include a section on No Landowner Authority?
Many thanks


As the registered keeper of the above vehicle, I wish to appeal the parking charge notice issued against it. I was neither the driver nor an occupant at the time the alleged contravention took place. I would like to have the parking charge notice cancelled based on the following grounds:

1. The Notice to Keeper does not conform to POFA requirements



1. The Notice to Keeper does not conform to POFA requirements

POFA schedule 4 paragraph 9 (2) (e) states:

9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2)The notice must—
(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

Britannia Parking have acknowledged in their rejection letter that their PCN is not POFA compliant. Since the PCN is not POFA compliant, I, the keeper, am not liable for this parking charge.



nosferatu1001
You include absolutely every single possible argument.
ostell
9 (2) (f) is also not there in the prescribed format
timbuktumaster
How does this look?

As the registered keeper of the above vehicle, I wish to appeal the parking charge notice issued against it. I was neither the driver nor an occupant at the time the alleged contravention took place. I would like to have the parking charge notice cancelled based on the following grounds:

1. The Notice to Keeper does not conform to POFA requirements
2. No landowner authority




1. The Notice to Keeper does not conform to POFA requirements

POFA schedule 4 paragraph 9 (2) (e, f) state:

9(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2)The notice must—
(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;
(f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—
(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,
the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;

Neither of these stipulations have been fulfilled in the PCN.

Britannia Parking have acknowledged in their rejection letter that their PCN is not POFA compliant. Since the PCN is not POFA compliant, I, the keeper, am not liable for this parking charge.

2. No Landowner Authority

I question Britannia Parking’s authority from the landowner, to enforce parking charges regarding alleged breaches at this car park.

BPA CoP paragraphs 7.1 & 7.2 dictate some of the required contract wording. I put Britannia Parking to strict proof of the contract terms with the actual landowner (not a lessee or agent who has no more title than the operator). I question Britannia Parking’s legal status to enforce this charge because there is no assignment of rights to pursue PCNs in the courts in neither their own name nor standing to form contracts with drivers themselves.

They do not own this car park and appear to have a bare licence to put signs up and ‘ticket’ vehicles on site, merely acting as agents on behalf of a principal. No evidence has been supplied lawfully showing that Britannia Parking is entitled to pursue these charges in their own right in the courts which is a strict requirement within the BPA CoP. I suggest that Britannia Parking are certainly not empowered by the landowner to sue customers and visitors to this car park and that issuing 'PCNs' by post is no evidence of any right to actually pursue charges in court.

In addition, Section 7.3 of the CoP states:

“The written authorisation must also set out:

a) the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined
b) Any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation
c) Any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement
d) Who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs
e) The definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.''

I put Britannia Parking to strict proof of compliance with all of the above requirements.

This is vital; I contend that the contract - if this operator produces one - does not reflect the signage and if only a basic agreement or 'witness statement' is produced, then this will fail to demonstrate compliance with 7.3 (in particular, point b and d, above).
Some parking companies have provided “witness statements” instead of the relevant contract. There is no proof whatsoever that the alleged signatory has ever seen the relevant contract, or, indeed is even an employee of the landowner. Nor would a witness statement show whether there is a payment made from either party within the agreement/contract which would affect any 'loss' calculations. Nor would it show whether the contract includes the necessary authority, required by the BPA CoP, to specifically allow Britannia Parking to pursue these charges in their own name as creditor in the Courts, and to grant them the standing/assignment of title to make contracts with drivers.

In POPLA case reference 1771073004, POPLA ruled that a witness statement was 'not valid evidence'. This witness statement concerned evidence which could have been produced but was not. So if the operator produces a witness statement mentioning the contract, but does not produce the actual un-redacted contract document, then POPLA should be consistent and rule any such statement invalid.


I require Britannia Parking to provide a full copy of the contemporaneous, signed & dated contract with the landowner showing evidence to meet 7.3 of the CoP. In order to comply, a non-landowner private parking company must have a specifically-worded contract with the landowner , not merely a ‘standard business agreement’ with a non-landholder managing agent which is true of any such business model. This cannot impact upon, nor create a contract with, any driver, as was found in case no. 3JD00517 ParkingEye v Clarke 19th December 2013




nosferatu1001
So nothing about signage?
timbuktumaster
I'm not sure what you mean about signage. I can't find anything about it in POFA. I fully understand it is expected that individuals do their own research but could you explain a tiny bit more?
nosferatu1001
POFA doesn't talk about signage at all

Signs are the ONLY way any supposed contract can be conveyed, so you should talk about whether those signs are conspicuous, whether they actually offer a contract or in fact FORBID You from doing something (a contract requires offer, acceptance, consideration - no offer, no contract) etc. The BPA also mandates entrance signage, that signs must be readable etc.

There are dozens of POPLA appeals, basically every single one talks about signs.
timbuktumaster
Unfortunately I didn't take any photos of the signs and the carpark is 100s of miles from where I live so I have no way of checking what the signs say on them. Do you think my Popla appeal will be ok without talking about signage?
Redivi
If the driver didn't see the signs, talk about them anyway and insist that Britannia provides pictures of all the signs in place and a site-map

Use Streetview to check the entrance sign
The BPA Code of Practice is clear that this must be present
timbuktumaster
Hi,
disgrunt
Edit post 20 ASAP.

timbuktumaster
Is this OK for Signage?



3. Inadequate Signage

Britannia Parking has not complied to the signage requirements laid out by BPA.

Section 18.2 of the BPA Code of Practice (2018) states:

18.2 Entrance signs play an important part in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore, as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of. Entrance signs must follow some minimum general principles and be in a standard format. The size of the sign must take into account the expected speed of vehicles approaching the car park, and it is recommended that you follow Department for Transport guidance on this. See Appendix B for an example of an entrance sign and more information about their use. A standard form of entrance sign must be placed at the entrance to the parking area. There may be reasons why this is impractical, for example: • when there is no clearly defined car park entrance • when the car park is very small • at forecourts in front of shops and petrol filling stations • at parking areas where general parking is not permitted.

I question whether the entrance sign at Silver Street car park complies to these stipulations, with the specifications given in Appendix 2 of the Code of Practice.

Section 18.3 of the BPA Code of Practice (2018) states:

18.3 Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm.

Section 18.3 of the BPA Code of Practice (2018) states:

18.7 You should display the BPA’s AOS logos at all sites. This will help the public to see that you are a legitimate operator, and show that the site is run properly

I question whether the signage at Silver Street car park is adequate and I would ask Britannia Parking to provide pictures of all the signs in place and a site-map to confirm the legitimacy of their signage.

-

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 © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.