Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Advice challenging ukpc @ Stevenage leisure park
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
Joeld
Hi

I'm looking for some advice on how to appeal a parking fine by UKPC on Stevenage Liesure park. I know the usual route is to simply ignore but it's a company car managed by a third party fleet company some I'm a little hesitant.

The ticket itself was issued today and my wife was the driver. She visited the park to take my 5 month old daughter to see a friend and have lunch. There are precisely two parent and child parking spaces on the whole park, both of which were full. As my daughter is in a car seat and pram my wife needed extra space to access the back of the car. With the two spaces full she parked across two spaces, taking care to be away from other vehicles in an otherwise almost empty car park (it was the midle of the day on a week day). Normally I wouldn't condone straddling two spaces but there wasn't much choice in this case.

Sure enough, after lunch etc there was a ticket on the car with the reason for the fine given as "not correctly parked within the markings of the bay or space". The signs around the leisure park make no mention of this being a findable offence although they do say "park within the marked bays"

I'm not sure what tac to take on the appeal, there is no denying that she straddled the bay but there were extenuating circumstances, the child seat was in the ack so it was clear she had a baby.

One thing I thought of going down is tat the fine is an unlawful penalty as the car park was empty and the charges are clearly not a pre-estimate of loss or actual damages caused by the trespass (yes I read the sticky word for word!).

Anyways, ideas appreciated, I love a good fight like this so there is no chance of me backing down and having read of a few other cases by ukpc on the same site, they sound like cowboys!
The Slithy Tove
QUOTE (Joeld @ Thu, 13 Dec 2012 - 19:25) *
I'm not sure what tac to take on the appeal, there is no denying that she straddled the bay but there were extenuating circumstances, the child seat was in the ack so it was clear she had a baby.

One thing I thought of going down is tat the fine is an unlawful penalty as the car park was empty and the charges are clearly not a pre-estimate of loss or actual damages caused by the trespass (yes I read the sticky word for word!).

Dont' bother with mitigating circumstances, or appealing to their better nature. They don't have one, and you'd be wasting your time.

Better go for the "hard" appeal, like you say, unlawful penalty, no loss to landowner, etc. It's not a trespass, as you were "invited" into the car park and didn't overstay. There are several examples of hard appeals in this forum, I think the user Gan has written a few. Make sure you also say that if the appeal is turned down, you want a POPLA code in order to appeal to them. Many seems to be folding with such an appeal.

But you DO need to appeal, in order to prevent them from sending anything to the lease company. Lease companies are particularly bad at knowing what to do with these tickets, and possibly even deliberately profit from them by adding their own unjustifiable fees for processing them.
bama
Am sure that place has come up before with dodgy clamping.
It may be that one those threads reveals the landowner/occupier.
No way the PPC owns it.

Wait for a 'Gan special'
Joeld
QUOTE (bama @ Thu, 13 Dec 2012 - 21:30) *
Am sure that place has come up before with dodgy clamping.
It may be that one those threads reveals the landowner/occupier.
No way the PPC owns it.

Wait for a 'Gan special'


Yup, I did some googling and it has come up many times, they are notorious in the area. It just annoys me that they play on people's ignorance, I know not to take this lying down but many people will just cough up and pay.



Oh, just dug up this http://www.legalandgeneralgroup.com/media-...rk_for_40m.html which suggests legal and general bought it earlier this year, no mention of UKPC.
bama
L&G may well have bought it. there is probably some other company in the middle though, I 'd bet on it.
Joeld
So has anyone got any suggestions as to what I should put in the appeal letter?

I guess something simple like:

QUOTE
I can confirm that I am the registered keeper of this vehicle.

I am contesting this charge as:

1. I do not believe you have sufficient interest in the land upon which the charge was issued
2. The amount claimed is an unlawful penalty and the charges claims do not represent any damaged caused or potential loss of business.

If you do not accept the above, please send me my POPLA code so I may take the case further.


How does that sound?
Gan
Apologies

I promised to draft something for you that raised the legal issues.

How about ?

Dear Sir

Ref ****

In accordance with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 I am challenging this parking invoice on behalf of the driver

It is my belief that you are not the land-owner but merely a contractor.
If this is correct, you do not have the legal capacity to issue the contracts that you claim.

Even you did have such a capacity, it's absurd to claim that visitors agree to pay such sums for parking in the manner that you allege.
What are you suggesting - that it's a reasonable charge is for the privilege of opening doors on one side a little wider - or is it, as I believe more likely, to discourage the practice ? If so, it's a penalty that has no part to play in Contract Law

I am familiar with the Department of Transport Guidance on the subject. The amount that you are claiming clearly bears no relation to any possible loss and is therefore in breach of Unfair Contract regulations.

Are you perhaps suggesting instead that an overhang into an adjacent bay would be trespass ? If so, I would be delighted if you would explain your calculation of the loss that has resulted to the land-owner and/or yourselves

I therefore request that the PCN is cancelled on the grounds that your claim is legal nonsense.
If you believe otherwise, please send the validation code so that POPLA can consider my position that I have no liability for the charge.

Yours Faithfully
Joeld
Thanks, that looks brilliant!
Joeld
So a follow up to this. I sent off a reply on behalf of my wife worded exactly as Gan suggested and sure enough back came a response but it wasn't quite what I was expecting. Basically they seemed to completely ignore everything I said and instead stated that the appeal had been dismissed as there was sufficient warning signs to warn of parking across two bays. The odd thing being that I never argued that there weren't!

Anyways I'm now wondering what is the best next step? Should I appeal to POPLA on the same grounds? I understand it costs UKPC money for me to do so which is reason enough for me. Either way, a copy of the letter is below, let me know what you think.

Jlc
Definitely appeal to POPLA - see the recent thread where apparently 2/3‘s are being upheld. (Don't believe it myself)

POPLA will probably ignore the legal arguments so an angle on the signs is probably best... Then ignore them if necessary.
tapas600
QUOTE (Gan @ Wed, 19 Dec 2012 - 10:57) *
I therefore request that the PCN is cancelled on the grounds that your claim is legal nonsense.

Thank you Gan.

We all need to master how to convey exactly this fine point of logic in all our communications with PPCs, POPLA, BPA and DVLA.
Joeld
Hello again

So due to my own stupid disorganization I didn't end up appealing to POPLA as by the time I got round to sitting down to type up the appeal the deadline had passed (the dangers of having a 7 month old eating all your time!). So now the threatening letters have started from the debt recovery folks but interesting the same day that the debt recovery letter arrived I got another letter from UKPC. This letter stated that they had given me the wrong POPLA reference number so even if I had gotten round to appealing, they wouldn't have been able to do anything as the wrong number was specified.

Do you think this changes anything? The only thing I can think of is that it should reset the appeal period and really it is a little rich that they screw up and still send the dogs after us.
The Slithy Tove
QUOTE (Joeld @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 13:22) *
Do you think this changes anything? The only thing I can think of is that it should reset the appeal period and really it is a little rich that they screw up and still send the dogs after us.

You can continue to ignore all the threats if you want.

Or you could get back to UKPC and demand from them a correct POPLA code. Also insist that they call off the debt collection agencies because, as far as you are concerned, you have not yet exhausted their appeals process.

At the end of the day, you won't be paying anyway. Just depends how you want to handle it.
rockabilly_rebel
QUOTE (Joeld @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 13:22) *
...and still send the dogs after us.


The dogs they send are toothless. Just keep the letters, do not pay these scammers.

Regards
Joeld
QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 13:28) *
QUOTE (Joeld @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 13:22) *
Do you think this changes anything? The only thing I can think of is that it should reset the appeal period and really it is a little rich that they screw up and still send the dogs after us.

You can continue to ignore all the threats if you want.

Or you could get back to UKPC and demand from them a correct POPLA code. Also insist that they call off the debt collection agencies because, as far as you are concerned, you have not yet exhausted their appeals process.

At the end of the day, you won't be paying anyway. Just depends how you want to handle it.


They actually sent the POPLA code in the letter explaining their screw up, they were sincerely sorry for their error (not for trying to scam me).
I am Weasel
Appeal to POLA anyway it will cost them £27
SchoolRunMum
QUOTE (Joeld @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 13:38) *
QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 13:28) *
QUOTE (Joeld @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 13:22) *
Do you think this changes anything? The only thing I can think of is that it should reset the appeal period and really it is a little rich that they screw up and still send the dogs after us.

You can continue to ignore all the threats if you want.

Or you could get back to UKPC and demand from them a correct POPLA code. Also insist that they call off the debt collection agencies because, as far as you are concerned, you have not yet exhausted their appeals process.

At the end of the day, you won't be paying anyway. Just depends how you want to handle it.


They actually sent the POPLA code in the letter explaining their screw up, they were sincerely sorry for their error (not for trying to scam me).






Definitely now use that to appeal to POPLA, with all your own points of appeal, plus the lack of useable verification code within the time frame allowed by the BPA code of practice, therefore the ticket should be cancelled. Include also the wording about UKPC not having any possessory title or rights ofoccupation in the car park which would allow them to allege contracts are being formed with drivers. Point out to POPLA that the signs don't help them when they have no ownership, and nor would any basic contract with the owner occupier as that simply allows them to carry out tasks on site, doesn't grant them title in the land (VCS -v- HMRC is the Court case which confirms this).

Here is a thread from MSE which shows a successful POPLA appeal and also look at mulronie's wording in post #27 there (go back to page 1 of the thread there), which summarises the 'no ownership so the firm can't offer contracts'argument:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...na#post59540801


HTH - also show us your draft appeal this week so we can advise any changes to make it a belter!
Joeld
So how is this:

I would like to make an appeal on the parking charge ref xxxxx
Firstly, UKPC did not provide me with the correct appeals number for POPLA this means that an appeal was not previously possible. This contravenes section 22.12 of the BPA code of practice which states that instructions on how to make an appeal may be given – this was done but incorrectly, additionally a reasonably amount of time must be given to lodge an appeal (35 days is suggested), the incorrect code has made this impossible. With such contraventions of the BPAs code of best practice I believe the charge should be cancelled.
Secondly, I believe the contract between UKPC is null and void as the parking company has no ownership of the land in question and so they are not legally entitled to form a contract between myself and themselves for the purposes of charging for incorrect parking. Legal precedent is set here in the case of Vehicle control services limited vs the commissioners for her majesties revenue and customs http://www.tribunals.gov.uk/financeandtax/...ices_v_hmrc.pdf
Finally if the points below are considered invalid, and that a contract exists, the charge levied represents a fine and not a valid charge for loss of business or damage caused. In this case no claim is made for damage caused so my only conclusion is that loss of business is being claimed, given that the charge was issued during a period on a weekday when the car park in question was virtually empty, it is impossible to justify that the use of two spaces has caused a loss of business to the owner. Additionally as the car park does not charge for parking for customers of the leisure park, the only possible charge that could be levied is £0.00 for using two spaces instead of one.
minotaur
QUOTE (Joeld @ Wed, 27 Feb 2013 - 14:56) *
So how is this:

I would like to make an appeal on the parking charge ref xxxxx
Firstly, UKPC did not provide me with the correct appeals number for POPLA this means that an appeal was not previously possible. This contravenes section 22.12 of the BPA code of practice which states that instructions on how to make an appeal may must be given – this was done but incorrectly, additionally a reasonably amount of time must be given to lodge an appeal (35 days is suggested), the incorrect code has made this impossible. With such contraventions of the BPAs code of best practice I believe the charge should be cancelled.
Secondly, I believe the contract between UKPC is null and void as the parking company has no ownership of the land in question and so they are not legally entitled to form a contract between myself and themselves for the purposes of charging for incorrect parking. Legal precedent is set here in the case of Vehicle control services limited vs the commissioners for her majesties revenue and customs http://www.tribunals.gov.uk/financeandtax/...ices_v_hmrc.pdf
Finally if the points below above are considered invalid, and that a contract exists, the charge levied represents a fine and not a valid charge for loss of business or damage caused. In this case no claim is made for damage caused so my only conclusion is that loss of business is being claimed, given that the charge was issued during a period on a weekday when the car park in question was virtually empty, it is impossible to justify that the use of two spaces has caused a loss of business to the owner. Additionally as the car park does not charge for parking for customers of the leisure park, the only possible charge that could be levied is £0.00 for using two spaces instead of one.

.
Louey
Hi I've just come across this post as I've just got a ticket at stevenage leisure park for parking slightly over white line again because of trying to get small children out safety & only 3 child spaces in a 1,200 space car park! I have appealed to UKPC & it was rejected (surprise) where I parked there were no clear signs & even the signs they do have are about 9 ft up a lamppost & you need a magnifying glass to read! There were loads of free spaces aswell & it is a free car park not sure what to do next?
Dennis Basher
The best thing to do next is to start a new thread.

You'll get plenty of good advice here, but to make it easier for everyone, the rule is one case, one thread.
SchoolRunMum
QUOTE (Louey @ Sat, 10 May 2014 - 22:44) *
Hi I've just come across this post as I've just got a ticket at stevenage leisure park for parking slightly over white line again because of trying to get small children out safety & only 3 child spaces in a 1,200 space car park! I have appealed to UKPC & it was rejected (surprise) where I parked there were no clear signs & even the signs they do have are about 9 ft up a lamppost & you need a magnifying glass to read! There were loads of free spaces aswell & it is a free car park not sure what to do next?


Win at POPLA of course!

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4816822

Read the section on How to win at POPLA and once you've drafted your version, post it in a new topic here on pepipoo if you want us to check it's a winner...obviously based on the linked examples in post #3 there on MSE.




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 © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.