Going to try and help a colleague of mine with a PCN that was received by post following a visit to the above retail park, which is located next to Cardiff City's Ground. I am aware that the car park has been subject to other threads, but this one does not seem to have been covered.

The driver of the vehicle, and passenger, having purchased a heavy item from one of the stores in the retail park on line, intended to collect the item on the day in question. The store has no loading bays, only disabled bays in front of the store, so the driver stopped on double yellow lines outside the store so that the passenger could collect the item and get it to the car in the shortest distance. At no time did the driver leave the vehicle, nor shut the vehicle down. Unfortunately, the process of collecting the item took a lot longer than anticipated, and the driver eventually moved the vehicle into a parking space, out of a sense of moral duty rather than any consideration for contracts etc.

A few days after the event (well within 14 days), the registered keeper received a PCN from New Generation Parking Management Limited, claiming a sum of £100 for parking on double yellow lines. I have yet to see the document, but will have a copy of it on Thursday to post.

After paying a visit to the car park today, and reviewing their signage, it seems that NGPM are trying to do things a bit differently to others. According to their signage, the basic tariff for parking is £100 for any user, waived if you comply with certain terms and conditions. Of course, they don't have a big sign at the entrance saying that it could cost you £100 to use the car park. Instead, they rely on a general sign saying that you must read the terms and conditions inside the car park, and a more detailed sign, which is impossible to read as it is on the approach to a four lane double roundabout on which ANPR cameras are fitted to record vehicles entering and leaving the area, which is made up of several different complexes and retail areas.

The landowner has already been established as Aberdeen Asset Management, the purchase of the retail complex being widely publicised in the local press. It is now managed by CBRE on behalf of AAM.

http://www.mynewsdesk.com/uk/cbre/pressrel...ortfolio-973900

Photos of the retail park entrance, showing a)main entrance sign, with detail terms and conditions sign behind.
Click to view attachment

b) vicinity of main entrance signage to traffic hazard, making detailed reading impossible.
Click to view attachment

c) Detailed sign showing exact terms and conditions. These signs are also present around the car park at regular intervals, but require the driver to leave the vehicle and inspect them at close range to be able to read them.
Click to view attachment

Questions that come to mind, even without seeing the PCN that I could do with guidance on.

1. Do NGPM legitimately have a claim that the signage is adequate to claim that a contract has been formed, that the driver agreed to pay £100, especially as the driver did not, at any time leave the vehicle. ( I think I know the answer, but you're more expert than I am?

2. Their signage says that 24 hour CCTV monitoring is in operation, but does not specify that it is used for parking enforcement. Is it permissible for a parking management company to issue PCN's via the ANPR route using CCTV, and does that still make it PoFA 2012 compliant?

3. Does the wording of their signage successfully negate the GPEOL argument at POPLA, by attempting to claim that the basic tariff for parking was £100, and that they are only claiming the advertised cost of parking which is unpaid rather than any loss.

4. Should anyone wish to deliberately enter into a contract by parking in accordance with one of the terms and conditions that make the tariff payable, there is no means of making that payment or information on how to pay on any signage. Does this render the contract unenforceable?

5. Is is worth approaching Cardiff City Council to see if the planning permission included scope for such a parking charge to be levied, particularly as they were heavily involved in the scheme as part of the creation of the Sports Village area of the City. If so, who is the best person to contact and using what form of enquiry.

6. If they are claiming £100 for parking, would not every PCN be subject to VAT. Anyone fancy a dig into their records?

How do the experts think that my colleague should now proceed. Time is of the essence unfortunately, because he received the PCN a little over two weeks ago but hasn't done anything with it. He was planning on ignoring it.

I should add that the vehicle has multiple insured drivers and at least two were in the vehicle on that day.

A NTK has a 28 day to respond too.

If that really is the fee, where do you pay? So it's not.
That signage is woefully inadequate, being too far to the left on approach, that you would have to take your eyes off the road.
In point 3 you only have to display the badge after securing the vehicle.

Soft appeal first, then with the popla code GPEOL will still win as on the day in question there is/was no commercial justification.

That was my point regarding could there be any contract. Irrespective of whether they have the right to offer a contract (which is unlikely), if they provide no means for accepting the consideration except by way of invoice after the fact, have they rendered any contract void.

Point 3 is there way of overcoming the argument that the blue badge slipped, blew upside down etc or in some other way became invisible. They place the onus on the driver or badge holder to check that it is visible, AFTER locking the car doors.

Of course, the terms and conditions are nonsense. Particularly the one about leaving the site on foot. Right next door to the football stadium, and therefore, not considered part of the site, is a MacDonalds restaurant (different car park operator and outside of the car park entry sign) KFC restaurant and a Harvester. How many people who have finished their shopping, and then decide to take the kids to McDonalds the 100 yards on foot realise that they have potentially just cost themselves £100 to park the car.

CCTV is not an acceptable medium, as proof, for the issue of PCNs. ANPR is (where there is a clear audit trail), but my understanding is that NGP use neither, rather an oik with a smartphone/digi-camera with a daily upload to the NGP website.

This should be the subject of a complaint to the DVLA. It's either ANPR with NtK within 14 days, or a NtD (windscreen ticket) and NTK between days 29 - 56 following the parking event.

This hybrid used by NGP should be assertively challenged.

Thanks for the information. As part of the appeal, I'll suggest that the RK insist on being provided with photographic evidence that is the basis for creation of the invoice. The photograph will soon prove what method was used by the angle it was taken from.

Am I right in saying though, that as the ANPR cameras cannot possibly see the location where the car was stopped, and there was no PCN left on the car, there is no way that PoFA can be used to claim Keeper Responsibility. They will have to chase the driver.

What if you stay for 91 minutes on a Match day but are legitimately using the car park. You have therefore broken their terms and conditions already. Stupidly enough how do you know if your not a fan. DO they inform all the drivers entering. When they say match day which team are they talking about and home or away. You can drive a bus just through that statement.

Apparently, it matters not if you are legitimately using the car park on a match day or not. If you exceed the 90 minutes on a match day (unspecified as to between what hours on a match day or what constitutes a match day) then you are expected to pay up.

For example
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=85246

i can imagine that the practice hits users of some facilities on the site quite hard on match days, for example the DW Sports fitness gym that shares the car park facilities. There is also the Glamorgan Archives office on the site, which cars would have to pass the ANPR cameras located on the roundabout at the entrance to the retail park to get to, even though they would not necessarily use the main part of the car park.

No need to over think this one. There are plenty of people in the area who are on the case. Complain to the local TS (Steve Bumford) about the inadequateness of the signage. After about 500 complaints he may do something. Another TS close by took action after 10 complaints but Cardiff TS appear to be much slower.

To get it killed, simple appeal for a POPLA code and hard appeal to POPLA on the signage and "loss". NGPM lose 75% of their POPLA appeals and with help here it is better than that.

Unfortunately the DVLA have watered down their stance. They originally said that if there was no NTD then the only acceptable means was proper ANPR with an audit trail & that a bloke on a bike with a camera & notebook was not sufficient. However they have changed their song & now say that they cannot legally force the PPCs to use ANPR when issuing NTKs in under 14 days but that best practice is that a ticket is issued ASAP i.e. the bloke on the bike should slap it on the windscreen.

But does the use of any type of recording device other than ANPR, for the purpose of circumnavigating the requirement to issue a PCN at the time invalidate the rights to apply keeper responsibility accorded to the operator under PoFA?

POFA 2012 is entirely about the process by which a keeper may be held responsible for an unpaid parking charge incurred by the driver. It says nothing about the means by which that charge is recorded or evidence of the debt.

The DVLA rules for selling RK details are entirely unconnected with POFA 2012 & come down to whether their is 'reasonable cause'. A bloke on a bike with camera & notebook could easily provide sufficient evidence to satisfy a court that the 'crime' occurred so it's not really surprising that the DVLA are obliged to sell RK details when requested in these circumstances.

Appeal now submitted after having seen the PCN. It contained two photographs taken from the rear of the vehicle, using a hand held camera so there was no reason why the individual taking the photos could not have issued an NtD at that point or, mitigated the losses by simply requesting the driver (who was sat in the vehicle) simply move it.

Appeal points:

Failure to prominently display key terms at the car park entry (namely tariff £100 per day or part of, waived at management discretion or on compliance with variable terms and conditions)

No evidence to contract existed

Inappropriate size and placement of signage at car park entrance in close proximity to essential traffic directional signage and traffic hazards which the driver would have been required to give greater priority to observing.

Insufficient proprietary rights to issue contracts

No method of accepting consideration to allow acceptance of any contract

No commercial justification for the standard daily tariff as advertised in small print on their signage. (as signs claim daily tariff is £100 per day or part thereof)

£100 not a genuine pre-estimate of losses (as PCN claims breach of contract, contrary to signage)

Failure on the part of their employee to mitigate losses at the time of witnessing the alleged breach of contract.

Delivery of PCN not in accordance with section 56, schedule 4 of PoFA, so no keeper responsibility exists.

PCN wording not compliant with PoFA.

I disagree with this, I think that the signage is for breach of contract rather than a contractual sum for the parking event. They've tried to make it for a contractual sum but failed.

Irrespective of whether they consider it a contractural sum, or breach of contract, I have hopefully challenged both options.

Their PCN states clearly that they are claiming a breach of contract.

My own feeling is that as the driver was loading on yellow lines, they have actually issued an incorrect document. According to the signage, the driver should have received a Parking Tariff Notice for £100 payable in accordance with contract indicated on the signage anyway.

I can post a copy of the PCN tonight if necessary.

The charge should be much more prominent but in some ways it's coming near to what signs must say if companies want to claim that they're offering parking contracts

They don't use the weasel words like "the driver agrees to pay a contractual charge" or similar used by all the others in the small print

Their "no return within two hours" term is worth testing to see what they do when they're informed of different and named drivers
They obviously can't form a contract with a vehicle

New Generation Parking Ltd is small enough to use cash-based accounting for its VAT but it must be charged

They must provide VAT receipts if requested

The best way to trip them up with this is to park as a business vehicle
A company is in a very good position to complain to HMRC if the supplier won't provide the invoice

The car park is, of course, clearly now paid-for car and subject to business rates
I'm sure the council will be pleased with the change

I won't disagree with you. The only way that this could be legally enforceable would be clearly worded signage at the entrance that the tariff is £100 per day or part therefore, which may be waived at the discretion of the management subjct to certain conditions being met. Of course, they know that such wording would cause uproar, not least with the traders in the retail park.

It's not only the no return that needs to be tested. The primary concern is that the term of free parking is variable between three hours and ninety minutes, dependant on it being a "match day". They not specify what a match day is; does that relate just to Cardiff City home games or does it also include other events like Wales home games at the National Stadium. It also allows them to claim contravention of terms by somebody parking for 95 minutes at 0900 in the morning, on the day of a 1930 kick off at the football stadium. It is unlikely that somebody parking at that time would even consider the relevance of such an impending event.

My next approach is to Martin Gilbert, the CEO of Aberdeen Asset Management, who own the Capital Retail Park for his comments on the operation of the car park and justification of the daily tariff that is advertised. An OP in a similar situation in January had the PCN cancelled by AAM.

My 2p's worth
1) If NGPM are claiming it's a contractual charge, then there is no reasonable cause for the DVLA to release the RK details, as no contravention of the parking conditions has occurred yet. The sign states that the driver has 14 days to pay from receipt of the parking tariff notice, therefore the 14 days has not yet started yet.
From the release of data section https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...om_DVLA__2_.pdf
"Landowners or their agents who offer car parking facilities under specific terms and conditions to contact drivers who may have parked their vehicle in contravention of the parking conditions."
2) The tariffs/terms in respect of non BB holders are in breach of the Equality Rights Act 2010

FYI the last accounts filed for NGPM were for 31st July 2013 which showed total debtors of £5 and net current liabilities of £53K. According to a FOI request they made approx 17,000 requests in the y/e 30/9/2014 so they would have had to register for VAT if they are claiming a contractual charge.

Copies of the PCN for your entertainment.

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment

Quick Update:

I received a PM on this board on Tuesday from NGPLTD, offering to cancel the notice as it appeared to them that the case was genuine and requesting either the PCN no or vehicle reg. After some consideration (knowing how some firms have behaved in the past) I provided the information, since I knew that the appeal was already submitted anyway.

Today, my colleague received confirmation by post that the PCN has been cancelled case has been closed. He has been informed of the usual practice in the event of success :-)

Sneaky so and so's

Actually it saved a lot of time and effort on both sides, so the approach by them was worthwhile.

Don't get me wrong I agree and it prevents further distress to your colleague but this clearly serves as a reminder to anyone that the villains monitor this forum and that when they are they're going to be presented with an argument they simply can't counter that they're likely to back down.

Glad you posted that to the forum as possibly others accept silently and the matters closed

I received a PM on this board on Tuesday from NGPLTD

I cannot see that name in the members list.

Hence why I took time to consider first what I had to gain or lose. The profile was newly created that day which led to further suspicions. Had I not already known that the appeal was in I probably wouldn't have responded.

Can they block members?

From my message list.

Parking Charge Notice NGPLTD [ Block ] Tue, 10 Mar 2015 - 15:01

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showuser=76222

They read these threads and they also have been under a lot of pressure from local politicians and the BPA. The signage is crap and they have officially been told it is crap.

So anyone that gets one of these should go in hard on the signage.

Parking at Capital Retail Park is provided for customers only. 3 hours of free parking is allowed, restricted to 90 minutes maximum stay on match/stadium event days to ease congestion and to ensure that all of our customers are able to access and utilise our parking facilities easily. Our parking policy, which we enforce through a third party provider (NGP Limited), is clearly displayed across the site. If any Capital Retail Park customers feel that they have been ticketed incorrectly, they can contact NGP’s appeals team in the first instance at 0871 434 4372 / enquiries@ngpltd.com.

Further appeals can be separately lodged at gill.garner@capitalretailparkcardiff.co.uk, marked for the attention of Gill Garner. All such further appeals will be investigated with reference to the stated parking policy. We seek to respond to all enquiries within 3 working days.

As you are the provider of the car park, you may like to review some of your statements, and the methods being employed by NGPM in enforcement.

1. The signage at the entry to the car park is totally inadequate in respect of offering the motorist an opportunity to review your terms and conditions. You have to pass through the ANPR camera's prior to having any opportunity to review your terms and conditions. You MUST have the main terms and conditions clearly visible at the entry in such a way that a motorist has the opportunity to SAFELY digest the information. I would suggest that the wording PARKING £100 per day - waived subject to terms and conditions would be more appropriate.

2. Even within the car park, you have to stop in order to read the terms and conditions. Thus, you may well have incurred a breach of contract even before having had the opportunity to review the extremely small print on your signage.

3. Collection of information relating to breaches other than overstay, and delivery of NtK to keepers does not comply with PoFA. NGPM are using an individual with a hand held camera to record registration numbers. They are not issuing Charge Notices at that time. Thus, they are failing to comply with section 9 of PoFA, as their tickets are neither placed on the car, nor by ANPR. In such circumstances, attempting to claim that the registered keeper is liable may be considered to be a fraudulent claim, as well as being contrary to the DVLA conditions for access to their records.

4. At what location do you specify to customers what construes a "match day" and at what point does the maximum parking time change from 180 minutes to 90 minutes. What is your definition of a "match day". After all, their are numerous sporting activities in Cardiff within a 1 mile radius of the car park. Does match days include International Rugby Days. If I drove in at 0800 in the morning, and stayed until 1000, am I going to receive a charge notice because it is considered a match day, when there is a football match kicking off at 1930 in the evening?

I've already driven coach and horses through the terms and conditions specified by NGPM, who withdrew the notice because they knew they couldn't win. I will happily do the same for anyone else, because your terms and conditions aren't worth the metal they're printed on.

I would think the site managers would be the first port of call but I suspect NGPM have provided the wording to be put here and thus Gill (if she wrote this) has opened up the retail park to a huge amount of further criticism. Page snapshot taken for posterity too.

And added to the wayback machine too.

This is not Chelmsford and I doubt NGPM Ltd are paying fifty thousand Pound a year to provide you [Capital Retail Park] with a space maximisation scheme.
Although the 72 000 capacity is probably in excess of what Chelmsford Retail Park are trying to prevent.

Long time reader new poster.  NGP are not on the site anymore.  Haven’t been for months. I have been informed by the stores.  No enforcement, no worry, park as you wish friends

Has Carmageddon resulted ?

Will have to pop round after work one day and see what the score is now as far as signs etc.

Wish I was in work this Saturday, as the City are at home, and Wales have a friendly against Ireland in the Millenium stadium. Testing time

Interesting.

I am sat in the Capital Retail Park car park at this moment. Cardiff City kicked off their zeason against Fulham in the football ground less than 100 yards away 30 minutes ago.

There are a significant number of empty parking paces in the car park (six next to me where I am parked and one large section behind CostCo is completely empty) so no Carmageddon.

However, all of the NGPM signs and the ANPR cameras are still in situ. One of the retailers believes that the patrol has been withdrawn from the car park but the ANPR is still active. I'm making enquiries.

My son works for one of the stores on site and he's been told that NGP no longer patrol the site nor the ANPR's work there. It's only been this month so I doubt that word has gotten around thats why the car park was near empty. I went to the last Cardiff match and it was half full so word must be getting around now.

The key question is why they are no longer there. The background to their removal could be very interesting if someone can find it out.

Surprisingly member NGPLTD (See Post #20) hasn't been back to the site since March

I recently fought, and beat, NGP...
NGPs signs also state that "vehicles parked with permission of NGP - FREE".
How can they allege any GPEOL if they allow free parking with permission??
Permission is irrelevant, a parked vehicle either incurs a loss or it doesn't!
They are confirming on their own signs that they incur no losses, or they wouldn't be able to offer free parking!!