Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 4th Apr 17, 5:02 PM
    • 16Posts
    • 9Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    Parking Eye - Defence for County Court Claim help please
    • #1
    • 4th Apr 17, 5:02 PM
    Parking Eye - Defence for County Court Claim help please 4th Apr 17 at 5:02 PM
    Hi all

    I've trawled this forum and many others for advice, and have had a phone call with one person with a similar issue at the same location (thank you Guy), in an effort to prepare my defence, but I have to say I'm going round in circles somewhat and would be grateful for your collective expert input!

    On 12 July last year, I "parked" in a Parking Eye managed car park at the White Horse in Rottingdean - oh yes I have seen the many complaints about this car park now!

    Essentially, I wasn't actually parked but I entered the "property" for a total of 11 minutes when I pulled off the highway to comfort my child who had been choking in his baby seat in the back of the car just moments before. It is a busy road and the first place I could swing in to get off the road to comfort him.

    I appealed my ticket, and lost. And then did a POPLA appeal and again lost.

    I didn't do a brilliantly written defence, quoted no legisation, etc etc as I basically I made the mistake of assuming my appeal would be read by a human with a heart who would understand my need to pull in quickly to deal with a distressed child, and not to pause to read in depth the Parking Notices and their terms and conditions, or indeed subseqently purchase a parking ticket "after the event".

    Anyway, I have now received County Court Claim dated 27 March 2017, (after failing to respond quickly enough to the LBCCC dated 02 March) so need to prepared my defence.

    I don't much feel like handing over £175 for 11 minutes (the pub have confirmed a ticket for this duration would have cost me £1.50) when I wasn't even occupying a parking space without a bit of a fight!

    Anyway, accpeting that I made a hash of my initial appeal and my POPLA appeal (reading the posts of others I do know this so please go easy on me!) I am wondering if my case is at all salvagable and would be grateful for input.

    TIA
Page 1
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 5th Apr 17, 12:34 AM
    • 45,826 Posts
    • 58,826 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #2
    • 5th Apr 17, 12:34 AM
    • #2
    • 5th Apr 17, 12:34 AM
    Yes, a defence can start from scratch and cover the bases you missed at appeal. This is worth fighting.

    The main point in your defence - apart from the sporadically placed signs which are far from obvious - seems to me to be the Grace Period requirement in the BPA Code of Practice which states that there must be a grace period for a driver to decide whether to stay or go and that grace period to leave, must be a MINIMUM of ten minutes (not a maximum).

    It follows that 11 minutes cannot be unreasonable, where the bare minimum time allowable is ten minutes, even for a person with no mitigating circs like you do. Pulling off the road to quickly sort out a distressed child is a situation which can be dangerous on the busy coast road and around there it's not a place with lots of options, no lay bys or anything (I know the road in question).

    Search the forum for 'Kelvin Reynolds observation period' and use his words, he speaks for the BPA on the subject and the BPA are the Trade Body for ParkingEye.

    Finally, about 18 months ago I recall from the trusted poster called IamEmanresu, that there was a BPA/DVLA forum meeting where it was AGREED that the grace period would in fact be stated as a minimum of 11 minutes in future. You need the minutes of that meeting but it can wait till your evidence/Witness Statement in a couple of months, before the hearing.

    You could email the DVLA under FOI and ask for the minutes of any meeting with the DVLA, and/or emails or any communications exchanged, regarding grace periods and in particular the agreement in 2015 to change private parking grace periods in the BPA Code, to not less than 11 minutes, in line with Council car parks.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 05-04-2017 at 12:36 AM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 5th Apr 17, 6:58 AM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    • #3
    • 5th Apr 17, 6:58 AM
    • #3
    • 5th Apr 17, 6:58 AM
    Brilliant. Thank you so much Coupon-mad. I was very much hoping you'd see this!
    I thought 11 minutes seemed incredibly harsh as had assumed there would be a grace period - hence not even thinking a ticket would be necessary. I had stopped longer than I thought - I actually thought it was just couple of minutes but ANPR shows otherwise but I guess time flies when you have an inconsolable child!
    Is my first step to just return the acknowledgement of service? Then do I not have just 14 days to submit my defence? Or can I add to it before the court date??
    thanks again.
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 5th Apr 17, 4:12 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    • #4
    • 5th Apr 17, 4:12 PM
    • #4
    • 5th Apr 17, 4:12 PM
    Thank you

    I found the minutes of the meeting. Sadly as a newbie i cant post the link for others but happy to provide if someone else wants to post it?

    Also found a news article from Jan this year about a woman stung with a £100 parking eye fine, in which there is a quote from Parking Eye saying they adhere to the BPA guidance on grace periods. It mentions she overstayed their "11 minute grace period" so I wondered whether to include it as "evidence" of the fact they allow 11 minutes grace.
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 5th Apr 17, 5:15 PM
    • 9,873 Posts
    • 8,852 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    • #5
    • 5th Apr 17, 5:15 PM
    • #5
    • 5th Apr 17, 5:15 PM
    Thank you

    I found the minutes of the meeting. Sadly as a newbie i cant post the link for others but happy to provide if someone else wants to post it?

    Also found a news article from Jan this year about a woman stung with a £100 parking eye fine, in which there is a quote from Parking Eye saying they adhere to the BPA guidance on grace periods. It mentions she overstayed their "11 minute grace period" so I wondered whether to include it as "evidence" of the fact they allow 11 minutes grace.
    Originally posted by aybeebeewhy
    I would. Can do no harm, but get a copy of the downloaded article, not just a transcript that you have done yourself.
    • guydorrell
    • By guydorrell 5th Apr 17, 6:35 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    guydorrell
    • #6
    • 5th Apr 17, 6:35 PM
    • #6
    • 5th Apr 17, 6:35 PM
    Hi Aybeebeewhy, glad you're getting the advice you need, and nice to chat - Coupon-mad rocks!
    So, I just had a call from the Brighton Argus, who I'd approached a while back after a local councillor suggested it. This case is so clear cut and simply a matter of a parent looking after their child that it is disgustingly amoral of the company to be prosecuting. Submit your acknowledgement and you can include a comment for consideration by them at that stage (I think, please correct if wrong!) but like I said, amazed that they're pursuing this. So, I'll give you a call tomorrow if that's ok but in the meantime does anyone else have horror story tickets from PE, particularly from this Rottingdean site but also elsewhere in the general Brighton area. If so, please drop me a line with a paragragh about your case and ALL your contact details and only do this if you're happy to have a journalist call you. They may well consider some anonymous contributions but will mostly want people happy to be identified (as I am). Come on, step up everyone, let's find out how many innocent people have been stiffed for £100 by this company and land-owner and let's put some pressure on this site to be clearer in their signage and fairer in their attitude.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 5th Apr 17, 7:49 PM
    • 45,826 Posts
    • 58,826 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 5th Apr 17, 7:49 PM
    • #7
    • 5th Apr 17, 7:49 PM
    I'm in the Argus circulation area so I would be interested to see what they say. I am glad you found the minutes of the meeting proving the BPA's decision in 2015 to make the minimum Grace Period eleven minutes. Great evidence for a claim and also a later claim by you, for their misuse and misappropriation of your data without 'reasonable cause'.

    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 5th Apr 17, 9:43 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    • #8
    • 5th Apr 17, 9:43 PM
    • #8
    • 5th Apr 17, 9:43 PM
    Maybe you should upgrade from the Argus to the Daily Mai Guy?

    "Grandmother-slapped-100-fine-despite-NOT-parking"

    The parking firm claim she stayed over their 11-minute 'grace period' and issued her with the fine.

    A spokesperson for ParkingEye said: 'ParkingEye adheres to the British Parking Association's guidelines on grace periods and as the driver overstayed beyond this period a parking charge was incurred.
    'ParkingEye operates an audited appeals process and encourages people to appeal if they feel there are mitigating circumstances.
    'If a motorist disagrees with our decision they have the option to appeal to the independent appeals service (POPLA).
    'In this case the driver did appeal to POPLA, who upheld our original decision.'
    Last edited by aybeebeewhy; 05-04-2017 at 9:46 PM.
    • gill33uk
    • By gill33uk 5th Apr 17, 9:55 PM
    • 36 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    gill33uk
    • #9
    • 5th Apr 17, 9:55 PM
    • #9
    • 5th Apr 17, 9:55 PM
    This is great, my 10 min and 48 second stay without actually parking may stand a chance, love this forum
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 5th Apr 17, 10:09 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    FOI request submitted to DVLA...

    @gill33uk - hope so for both of us!
    • Lamilad
    • By Lamilad 6th Apr 17, 2:20 AM
    • 591 Posts
    • 1,217 Thanks
    Lamilad
    I found the minutes of the meeting. Sadly as a newbie i cant post the link for others but happy to provide if someone else wants to post it?
    Paste the link changing http to hxxp. Someone will correct it for you
    • guydorrell
    • By guydorrell 6th Apr 17, 10:14 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    guydorrell
    Argus article?
    Hi @Gill33uk, do you mind me asking what the circumstances of your 10 min stay were? what stage you're at in the process? and whether you'd be interested in your case being in the article?
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 20th Apr 17, 4:05 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    OK so I have drafted my Defence...would anyone be prepared to comment on it for me?
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 20th Apr 17, 8:58 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    hxxp://xxx.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/Meeting%20Notes/Governance/20150730_PDandS_Board_Action_Notes.pdf
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 20th Apr 17, 9:02 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    My Draft Defence for Court


    Background

    I was the driver of the vehicle. I entered the car park from the highway in a distressed state myself as my young son (then 2 years old and restrained in a child-seat in the rear of the car) had begun to choke. I needed to stop immediately but we were on a busy main road - the A27 coast road - with double yellow lines, raised kerb, no lay-bys or pull-ins and heavy traffic. It would have been dangerous to stop on the road, but I needed to stop very urgently. I pulled into the first available exit which happened to be the entrance to the White Horse Public House Car Park.

    With cars parked along one side of the entrance road it was impossible for me to pull over on the entrance road and so I had no choice but to enter the Car Park. I did notice a small sign at the entrance indicating the car park was a Pay & Display however clearly at this point it was not my first priority to read and establish the parking requirements set out on the small sign at the entrance. I did not see any other signs.

    Unbeknownst to me, at this point I was already being timed. I had no idea of this unfair business practice which was not obvious at all and the cameras were very small and hidden high up. I was simply looking for somewhere safe to halt the car quickly to facilitate attending urgently to the welfare of my child.

    To be clear I had no intention of parking and leaving my vehicle. I was not abusing a Pay & Display car park by choosing not to pay. I was unaware that ANPR was in operation and I was being timed from the moment I entered the car park. I did not park my vehicle in a marked bay. I did not prevent someone else from using a space with my vehicle's presence. I did not exit my vehicle to investigate the Terms of the car park usage and I did not leave my vehicle to go and find the ticketing machine to read the terms and conditions.

    I drove in purely to get off a busy highway to deal with my distressed child and not with the intention of finding a parking space. , I halted my car quickly and attended to my son who fortunately cleared the blockage in his throat himself and, although he was distressed, he did not need medical attention but just reassurance and comforting. I did not park in a marked bay or leave my vehicle at any time and had left the car park again within a (perfectly reasonable) 11 minutes as proven by the ANPR system operated by ParkingEye at the site.

    I am appealing this unfair parking charge from ParkingEye on the following grounds:

    1. No reasonable grace period allowed.

    The BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice (CoP) Control and enforcement of parking on private land and unregulated public car parks (June 2013 update) refers specifically to Grace Periods.

    It specifically states:

    13 Grace periods
    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. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.



    IN fact at a meeting of the Professional Development & Standards Board (30th July 2015) (see point 7. of the minutes) there was a lengthy discussion about proposed code amendments. Implications of the 10 minute grace period were discussed and the Board agreed […] that the clause should comply with DfT guidelines in the English book of by-laws to encourage a single standard. Board agreed that as the guidelines state that grace periods need to exceed 10 minutes clause 13.4 should be amended to reflect a mandatory 11 minute grace period.

    The recommendation from the meeting was to
    (i) Reword Clause 13.4 to ‘If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 11 minutes’.

    In addition, the new IPC Code of Practice (Version 5, October 2016) states:

    B.15. Grace Periods
    B.15.2 Drivers must be allowed a minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a pre- paid or permitted period of parking has expired.

    It follows that 11 minutes cannot be unreasonable, where the bare minimum time allowable is ten minutes, even for a person with no mitigating circumstances such as those I have detailed above.

    2. Inadequate Signage

    The Car Park has very minimal signage. On the route into and exiting the car park I would only have seen the one small sign at the entrance, for a brief moment as I entered the car park. No other signs or indication that the car park was a Pay & Display with ANPR was in view.

    I enclose a plan showing the location of the signs, parking machines and the route taken by my vehicle which clearly demonstrate both the inadequacy of the signage and that when I left the car park,

    The sporadically placed signs at this site are far from obvious. The signs are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself.

    I did not see any additional signs, excepting the one at the entrance and am not bound to have seen them either.

    You can see from the sign photos attached that you can only just make out a tariff but there is nothing about £100 and the wording was almost illegible to a driver of a moving vehicle. There were no clear signs near where I stopped my vehicle. As such, there was no adequate notice of any £100 charge. There was no contract nor agreement on the 'parking charge' at all.

    I submit that I did not have a fair opportunity to read about any terms involving this huge charge, which is out of all proportion and not saved by the dissimilar 'ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis' case. The terms on the single visible sign were unreadable and the sign is not like the ‘brief & prominent’ signs in the Beavis case.

    As evidence that this is inadequate notice I refer you to the BPA CoP again, which in section 18 describes the signage required.

    18 Signs 18.1 A driver who uses your private car park with your permission does so under a licence or contract with you. If they park without your permission this will usually be an act of trespass. In all cases, the driver’s use of your land will be governed by your terms and conditions, which the driver should be made aware of from the start. You must use signs to make it easy for them to find out what your terms and conditions are. 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. 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. 18.4 If you intend to use the keeper liability provisions in Schedule 4 of POFA 2012, your signs must give ’adequate notice’. This includes: • specifying the sum payable for unauthorised parking • adequately bringing the charges to the attention of drivers, and • following any applicable government signage regulations. See paragraphs 2(2), 2(3) and 12 of the Schedule. 18.5 If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract. 18.6 The wording you include on your specific parking terms signage is your decision. However, you should try to use plain and intelligible language in all your signs and information.,

    Letter Height Visibility is also discussed here:

    hxxp://xxx.signazon.com/help-center/sign-letter-height-visibility-chart.aspx

    ''When designing your sign, consider how you will be using it, as well as how far away the readers you want to impact will be. For example, if you are placing a sales advertisement inside your retail store, your text only needs to be visible to the people in the store. 1-2” letters (or smaller) would
    work just fine. However, if you are hanging banners and want drivers on a nearby highway to be able to see them, design your letters at 3” or even larger.''

    ...and the same chart is reproduced here:
    hxxp://xxx.ebay.co.uk/gds/Outdoor-Dimensional-Sign-Letter-Best-Viewing-Distance-/10000000175068392/g.html

    ''When designing an outdoor sign for your business keep in mind the readability of the letters. Letters always look smaller when mounted high onto an outdoor wall''. ''...a guideline for selecting sign letters. Multiply the letter height by 10 and that is the best viewing distance in feet. Multiply the best viewing distance by 4 and that is the max viewing distance.''

    So, a letter height of just half an inch, placed high on a wall or pole, is woefully inadequate in an outdoor car park. Given that letters look smaller when high up on a wall or pole, as the angle renders the words less readable due to the perspective & height, you would have to stand right in front of it and still need a magnifying glass, for a driver to be able to read any terms.

    Under Lord Denning's Red Hand Rule, the charge should have been effectively: 'in red letters with a red hand pointing to it' - i.e. VERY clear and prominent with the terms in large lettering, as was found to be the case in the car park in 'Beavis'. A reasonable interpretation of the 'red hand rule' and the 'signage visibility distance' tables above and the BPA Code of Practice, taking all information into account, would require a parking charge and the terms to be displayed far more transparently. Indeed in the Consumer Rights Act 2015 there is a 'Requirement for transparency':

    (1) A trader must ensure that a written term of a consumer contract, or a consumer notice in writing, is transparent.
    (2) A consumer notice is transparent for the purposes of subsection (1) if it is expressed in plain and intelligible language and it is legible.

    So, for this appeal, I put this operator to strict proof of where and for how long, the car was actually stopped and (from photos taken in the same lighting conditions) how their signs appeared on that date, at that time, from the angle of the driver's perspective. Equally, I require this operator to show how the entrance signs appear from a driver's seat - and at BOTH P&D machines - not stock examples of 'the sign' in isolation/close-up. I submit that full terms simply cannot be assimilated from a car before parking nor read & understood quickly at the machine. Mere 'stock examples' of close-ups of the (alleged) signage terms will not be sufficient to disprove this and a lack of machine pictures will mean my photo remains unchallenged.

    3. Inadequate warning about use of ANPR

    The ANPR signs (if any) fail to state how the data will be used or that the clock is ticking before one even parks, and certainly well before even reading the terms and deciding whether to stay.

    I had no idea that my total stay would be calculated from the moment I drove in. This is a BPA CoP breach as well as an ICO breach.

    and means the driver could not make an informed decision. As there are no signs to explain otherwise, the ANPR system cannot secretly calculate the time from entry from the road and the PCN was not properly given.

    3. Inadequate Observation Period

    Given the lack of obvious signage or machines at this site, my actions surely fall well within a reasonable 'observation period' (at the start) in addition to any 'grace period' (the time allowed to get back into the car, vacate any space, drive past other cars and queue at the road, to leave, which the CoP defines must be a MINIMUM of 11 minutes in itself).

    Kelvin Reynolds of the BPA says in a published, official article about good practice:

    hxxp://xxx.britishparking.co.uk/News/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.”

    So the BPA believes that 5-10 minutes 'observation' period is acceptable depending upon various factors and then you must allow a MINIMUM of another ten minutes at the end - and Mr Reynolds says: ''there is a difference between ‘grace’ periods and ‘observation’ periods in parking and that good practice allows for this.''

    The conclusion must be that with 5 - 10 minutes allowed for arrival plus AT LEAST ten minutes to subsequently leave, a mere 16 minutes all told in this particular badly-maintained car park must not generate a penalty against drivers who leave as soon as they can, waiting to drive past parked cars and giving way to arriving cars, and out onto the busy road.


    4. Non-acceptance of Terms and Conditions.

    Given points 2, 3 and 4 above, I had not had an opportunity to see the terms and conditions and therefore cannot and did not accept any contract.

    To be clear: I did NOT accept their contract by performance because (unlike in ParkingEye v Beavis) my actions did not involve parking and leaving the car. In fact it is common ground that I soon drove out. That action, within mere minutes, was recorded by the ANPR exit camera and the fact I left as quickly as I possibly could, given my mitigating circumstance described, proves my non-acceptance of the terms.

    The PCN cannot be deemed fairly or properly given.


    5. 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 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.

    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. This site has also changed hands more than once in recent years so the contract needs to be shown to prove start and expiry dates as well as to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by each party to the 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.

    6. Unfair and unreasonable level of charge

    I have called the White Horse Hotel and been advised that, had I seen and been aware of and purchased a ticket to cover the 11 minutes that I was on site, it would have cost just £1.50. It seems to me that the charge levied by Parking Eye for non-payment is excessive and unfair and does not adequately represent any potential loss suffered by the establishment, even if I had been parked in an official marked bay (which I was not), and prevented some other person from parking (which I did not) for those 11 minutes that I was within the car park.


    6. Bad practice by the Operator

    I believe that evidence shows that this Car Park is being operated in such a way to extract money from innocent users through inadequate and misleading signage and a total disregard for customers and users of the car park.

    I am supporting this view with a series of reviews found on Trip Advisor about the hotel and its shocking car parking practices. You can see that I am not the only one to fall foul of this or to feel that it is an intentional ploy be the operator, Parking Eye.
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 20th Apr 17, 9:05 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    For Background here is a copy of the response from POPLA where they refused my Appeal. They quoted Beavis vs Parking Eye and also state that by entering the land I accept the contract - which clearly I was not aware of!


    Your parking charge Appeal against Parking Eye Ltd.
    Thank you for your patience while we considered the information provided for your Appeal.
    We have now reached the end of the Appeal process and have come to a decision. The decision is final and there is no further option for Appeal.
    The Operator issued parking charge notice number XXXX, arising out of the presence of a vehicle with registration mark XXXXXXX.
    The Appellant Appealed against liability for the parking charge.
    The Assessor has considered the evidence provided by both parties and has determined that the Appeal be Refused.
    In order to avoid any further action by the Operator, payment of the parking charge should be made within 14 days.
    Reasons for the Assessor’s determination: When entering onto a private car park, the motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage at the site sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. Therefore upon entry to the car park, it is the duty of the motorist to review the terms and conditions, and comply with them, when deciding to park. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage that states “Parking Tariffs Apply: Failure to comply with the terms and conditions will result in a Parking Charge of: £100”. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the appellant’s vehicle, registration number XXXXX entering the car park at 13:57, and exiting at 14:08, totalling a stay of 11 minutes. The operator states that it has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as the appellant has failed to make payment for the parking period. The appellant states that they entered the car park as they needed to pull over to comfort their child, who was upset due to previously choking on a raisin and was shaken due to this. The appellant advises that they did not read the signage due to their circumstances, and states that the charge is excessive in consideration of the situation.
    The legality of parking charges has been the subject of a high profile court case, ParkingEye-v-Beavis. Cambridge County Court heard the case initially, handing down a decision in May 2014 that a parking charge of £85 was allowable. It held that the parking charge had the characteristics of a penalty, in the sense in which that expression is conventionally used, but one that was commercially justifiable because it was neither improper in its purpose nor manifestly excessive in its amount. Mr Beavis took the case to the Court of Appeal, which refused the appeal in April 2015, stating that the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable. Mr Beavis further appealed to the Supreme Court, which on 4 November 2015, concluded: “…the £85 charge is not a penalty. Both ParkingEye and the landowners had a legitimate interest in charging overstaying motorists, which extended beyond the recovery of any loss. The interest of the landowners was the provision and efficient management of customer parking for the retail outlets. The interest of ParkingEye was in income from the charge, which met the running costs of a legitimate scheme plus a profit margin. Further, the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable, having regard to practice around the United Kingdom, and taking into account the use of this particular car park and the clear wording of the notices.” Having considered the decision of the Supreme Court, I conclude that the parking charge in this instance is allowable. Although the charge may not be a genuine pre-estimate of loss; the signage at the location is clear, the motorist did not keep to the terms and conditions set out on the signage, and the charge is neither extravagant nor unconscionable. When looking at appeals, POPLA considers whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract. Even if a motorist presents mitigating circumstances setting out exceptional reasons why they did not keep to the parking conditions, POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. While I empathise with the appellant’s situation on the day of the parking event, it is simply not within our remit to allow an appeal on mitigating circumstances. Upon consideration of the evidence, the appellant failed to make payment for the parking period, and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the car park. As such, I can only conclude that the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly I must refuse this appeal..
    Accordingly, the Appeal is Refused.
    Yours sincerely
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 20th Apr 17, 9:25 PM
    • 45,826 Posts
    • 58,826 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/Meeting%20Notes/Governance/20150730_PDandS_Board_Action_Notes.pdf

    Thanks for that, I saw that a year or more ago and it needs to be used more in POPLA appeals and defences with small overstays. I understand the BPA are currently re-writing the CoP and the last draft I saw (courtesy of someone in the know), showed they had conveniently *forgotten* this 11 minutes minimum grace period, so an email or two to Steve Clark at the BPA might be in order...

    Re the defence, it is too wordy, just bullet points are needed at this stage. Remove most of the background:

    I was the driver of the vehicle. I entered the car park from the highway in a distressed state myself as my young son (then 2 years old and restrained in a child-seat in the rear of the car) had begun to choke. I needed to stop immediately but we were on a busy main road - the A27 coast road - with double yellow lines, raised kerb, no lay-bys or pull-ins and heavy traffic. It would have been dangerous to stop on the road, but I needed to stop very urgently. I pulled into the first available exit which happened to be the entrance to the White Horse Public House Car Park.

    With cars parked along one side of the entrance road it was impossible for me to pull over on the entrance road and so I had no choice but to enter the Car Park. I did notice a small sign at the entrance indicating the car park was a Pay & Display however clearly at this point it was not my first priority to read and establish the parking requirements set out on the small sign at the entrance. I did not see any other signs.

    Unbeknownst to me, at this point I was already being timed. I had no idea of this unfair business practice which was not obvious at all and the cameras were very small and hidden high up. I was simply looking for somewhere safe to halt the car quickly to facilitate attending urgently to the welfare of my child.

    To be clear I had no intention of parking and leaving my vehicle. I was not abusing a Pay & Display car park by choosing not to pay. I was unaware that ANPR was in operation and I was being timed from the moment I entered the car park. I did not park my vehicle in a marked bay. I did not prevent someone else from using a space with my vehicle's presence. I did not exit my vehicle to investigate the Terms of the car park usage and I did not leave my vehicle to go and find the ticketing machine to read the terms and conditions.

    I drove in purely to get off a busy highway to deal with my distressed child and not with the intention of finding a parking space. , I halted my car quickly and attended to my son who fortunately cleared the blockage in his throat himself and, although he was distressed, he did not need medical attention but just reassurance and comforting. I did not park in a marked bay or leave my vehicle at any time and had left the car park again within a (perfectly reasonable) 11 minutes as proven by the ANPR system operated by ParkingEye at the site.
    You are not doing an appeal:
    I am appealing this unfair parking charge from ParkingEye on the following grounds:
    The wording reads like a POPLA appeal right now, too much detail. Try searching the forum form 'ParkingEye defence grace periods' and find a defence (not POPLA appeal) written in recent months, to crib from the shorter style.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 20-04-2017 at 9:31 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 20th Apr 17, 9:56 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    Thanks Coupon Mad. Do I get a chance to say all this stuff? Or do I just wait and see. I was thinking I needed to get all my defence across.
    • aybeebeewhy
    • By aybeebeewhy 20th Apr 17, 9:59 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    aybeebeewhy
    I can only find my own posts using that search. Hmmm.
    I'm scared of not saying enough - as seems to be the case in both my POPLA and initial appeal to Parking Eye.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 20th Apr 17, 10:12 PM
    • 45,826 Posts
    • 58,826 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Thanks Coupon Mad. Do I get a chance to say all this stuff? Or do I just wait and see. I was thinking I needed to get all my defence across.
    Originally posted by aybeebeewhy
    You get to do a witness statement later, before a hearing (as explained in post #2 of the NEWBIES thread). Your defence at this stage merely needs to cover all the bases you want to explain in court later, not explain the details. So, just short numbered paragraphs as per the other examples on the forum - and some are linked in post #2 of the NEWBIES thread.
    PRIVATE PCN in England/Wales? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT

    Click on the trail, top of this page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    DON'T read old advice to ignore, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

97Posts Today

1,742Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Just leaving Manchester after the funeral of my beloved grandma Gladys who passed away last night. https://t.co/nuC9ry5mP6

  • The strange thing with a 4yr old is having to play & smile while inside feeling sick for those in trauma in my birth town #Manchester

  • Just a quick ta-ta for now. I'm taking the week off for family time with mini and Mrs MSE. So I won't be here much. Back after the bank hol

  • Follow Martin