ParkingEye Overstay - Appeal

I have the following appeal written up and hope I can get some insight and suggestions. The keeper ignored the initial requests for information and missed the POPLA appeal dates.

To quickly summarise, the claim is for inadequate grace periods, so wonder if the landowner authority statement is needed at all??? Any help and suggestions appreciated.

---

I am the registered keeper and I contend that I am not liable for this parking charge from ParkingEye at Eastgate Retail Park on the basis of the below points:

1) No evidence of Landowner Authority
2) Grace periods unclear and not properly applied

1) No evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice

As this operator does not have proprietary interest in the land then I require that they produce an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner. The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including exemptions - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do and any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed, generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.

Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in the BPA CoP) and basic information such as the land boundary and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to charge (which cannot be assumed to be the sum in small print on a sign because template private parking terms and sums have been known not to match the actual landowner agreement).

Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:

7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.

7.3 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

3) No period of grace given for the driver to read the signs within the car park and no grace period was given to safely exit the car park afterwards.

The BPA Code of Practice (CoP) makes it mandatory for operators to allow grace periods at the start and end of parking, before enforcement action can be taken.

The CoP states:

“13.1 Your approach to parking management must allow a driver who enters your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.”
“13.2 You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.”
“13.3 You should be prepared to tell us the specific grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is.”
“13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action.”

The driver of the car at the time was captured by ANPR cameras driving in to the car park at 11:39:32 and driving out at 15:59:17 on the same date. Total time from driving in the main gate and exiting was 4 Hours 19 mins.

Later that day the driver exited the main gate at 15:59:17 9 minutes after the time had ended at 15:49:32. When returning to their car within the 4 hours, they took a while to leave the car park as it was now very busy, being the start of rush hour traffic, and there was a queue of cars to exit the car park. An addition 9 minutes is not an unreasonable time to safely get ready and leave the car park and is below the minimum 10 minutes allowed as a grace period as set out in the BPA code of practice.

Kelvin Reynolds of the BPA says there is a difference between ‘grace’ periods and ‘observation’ periods in parking and that good practice allows for this:

britishparking.co.uk/News/good-car-parking-practice-includes-grace-periods

Good car parking practice includes ‘grace’ periods

“An observation period is the time when an enforcement officer should be able to determine what the motorist intends to do once in the car park. The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket,” he explains.

“No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”

The BPA’s guidance defines the ‘grace period’ as the time allowed after permitted or paid-for parking has expired but before any kind of enforcement takes place.

The BPA (Kelvin Reynolds is the Director of Policy & Public Affairs) is on record as shown above, as saying that the 'observation period' at the start might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes, depending on various factors”.

The alleged overstay, given Kelvin Reynolds' defined 'observation time' and the type of businesses at the location is certainly possible. Time would have been taken just driving in, no doubt in a queue, dodging groups of pedestrians carrying shopping and also waiting for other cars turning and reversing to park or leave, before reaching an empty bay then parking.

I believe that the 10 minutes it took to work out if they were going to park, read the rules and signs regarding parking and find a space to park to be completely ‘reasonable’.

Taking both BPA 'Observation' and 'Grace' Periods into account, considering the type and location of this busy car park, I contend that the PCN was not properly given.

It is very clear from the evidence that ParkingEye have failed to uphold the minimum grace periods as set out in the BPA Code of Practice as the total time in the carpark exceeded the free parking period in total by only 19 minutes (10 minutes prior to deciding to stay, and 9 minutes after the parking period had ended).

Therefore it is respectfully requested that this parking charge request appeal be upheld.