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
    • Bpool17
    • By Bpool17 17th Jun 17, 11:05 PM
    • 6Posts
    • 4Thanks
    Bpool17
    ParkingEye Abersoch Golf Club
    • #1
    • 17th Jun 17, 11:05 PM
    ParkingEye Abersoch Golf Club 17th Jun 17 at 11:05 PM
    Could anyone help please?

    On the 12/05/2017 we parked in the Abersoch Golf Club Beach car park, paid for a ticket and displayed it in the windscreen. We then went for a walk and on returning we left the carpark about 1hr before our parking time expired. We have now received a Parking Charge Notice for £100! Unfortunately, we did not keep the ticket (but will certainly do so in future!) I have read through a lot of relevant threads on your site and it seems important to mention that the PCN does not make any mention of POFA/keeper liability after 29 days. Also important (I think) is the fact that 27 days elapsed between the alleged offence and the Parking Charge Notice being issued.
    The date of the alleged offence was 12/05/2017
    Date Parking charge notice issued 08/06/2017 (27 days after alleged offence)
    Date received 10/06/2017 (at the earliest, as we were away on holiday from 09/06/17 and did not read the PCN until we returned on the 15/06/2017)
    Should I include the following in the template after the first paragraph? “You have failed to act in accordance with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Paragraph 9 (sections 4b & 5) which state:
    (4)The notice must be given by—
    (a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
    (b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
    (5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.

    Should I also complain to the Abersoch Golf Club who I believe own the land?

    Could you please confirm that this is the correct template to use?

    Dear Sirs

    Re: PCN No. ....................

    I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car.

    I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis.Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers.

    There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 and offer me a POPLA code, or cancel the charge.

    Should you obtain the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause, please take this as formal notice that I reserve the right to sue your company and the landowner/principal, for a sum not less than £250 for any Data Protection Act breach. Your aggressive business practice and unwarranted threat of court for the ordinary matter of a driver using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me.

    I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

    Yours faithfully,


    THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE KEEPER GOES HERE. THE DRIVER IS NOT IDENTIFIED.


    Many thanks.
Page 1
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 17th Jun 17, 11:29 PM
    • 50,584 Posts
    • 63,969 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #2
    • 17th Jun 17, 11:29 PM
    • #2
    • 17th Jun 17, 11:29 PM
    The date of the alleged offence was 12/05/2017
    Date Parking charge notice issued 08/06/2017 (27 days after alleged offence)
    You have a 'golden ticket' and will win at POPLA stage, as long as you only appeal as the keeper and do not imply or name the driver. Count your lucky stars they sent it too late for keeper liability.

    Is this a company car? If so, better to call yourself lessee/hirer and you will still win at POPLA.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Bpool17
    • By Bpool17 18th Jun 17, 11:28 AM
    • 6 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Bpool17
    • #3
    • 18th Jun 17, 11:28 AM
    • #3
    • 18th Jun 17, 11:28 AM
    Hi Coupon-mad,
    Thanks for the prompt reply. No, it isn't a company car but our private car. Could we just use your expertise to check that this is the right template and whether to include the bit about failing to act in accordance with the FOPA rules, and should we contact the golf club - from what we've read they don't seem to have any sympathy but should we do it as a procedural thing?
    Thanks.
    • Redx
    • By Redx 18th Jun 17, 11:37 AM
    • 15,958 Posts
    • 19,989 Thanks
    Redx
    • #4
    • 18th Jun 17, 11:37 AM
    • #4
    • 18th Jun 17, 11:37 AM
    yes use the blue text template "as is" , never make changes unless you know what you are doing

    add an extra paragraph stating they they have failed POFA2012 (not FOPA or FAUX-PAS or covfefe) so as keeper you are not liable and they should contact the driver (who shall not be named)

    also change the DVLA data part to the past tense (from the future tense) , because they have already obtained that data

    I already posted the correct example of this recently in post #19 of this thread

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5663386

    any landholder complaint should be as keeper without revealing who was driving , so you were all "occupants" of the vehicle , or THE KEEPER or THE DRIVER etc

    the point here is that this isnt an english language exam so the use of the words "me , myself and I" are "banned" , in order to protect the identities of who did what

    never hand it to them on a plate, never disclose who was driving either
    Last edited by Redx; 18-06-2017 at 2:54 PM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Bpool17
    • By Bpool17 18th Jun 17, 2:48 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Bpool17
    • #5
    • 18th Jun 17, 2:48 PM
    • #5
    • 18th Jun 17, 2:48 PM
    Hi Redx,

    Thanks very much for the help - I have followed your instructions exactly. The appeal has now been submitted.

    Thanks again.
    • Bpool17
    • By Bpool17 26th Jun 17, 8:28 AM
    • 6 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Bpool17
    • #6
    • 26th Jun 17, 8:28 AM
    • #6
    • 26th Jun 17, 8:28 AM
    My appeal to ParkingEye has failed and I have been given a POPLA reference number.
    Below, I have put together a draft POPLA appeal, (most of which is copied from a winning appeal against the same car park in 2016) and I'd be very grateful if one of the experts could check over it before I submit it to POPLA?
    Thanks, Bpool17



    Dear Popla

    POPLA Ref. xxxx – ParkingEye Parking Charge Notice Ref. xxxxx

    I write to lodge my formal appeal in respect of the above-detailed Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) issued by ParkingEye in respect of an alleged breach of Parking Terms and Conditions at Abersoch Golf Club Beach car park on 12/05/2017. I confirm that on that date I was the vehicle’s keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definition in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”).

    I set out below why I am not liable for this parking charge:

    1) ParkingEye’s Notice to Keeper failed to meet the mandatory delivery timescales laid down by POFA.
    2) ParkingEye does not have the standing or authority to pursue charges or to form contracts with drivers using this particular car park.
    3) The car park signage was inadequate.
    4) The car park signage failed to notify the driver that ParkingEye intended to exercise its rights under POFA (subject to its compliance with the requirements of POFA) to pursue the vehicle’s keeper for the parking charge in the event that the driver did not pay the charge.

    1) ParkingEye’s Notice to Keeper failed to meet the mandatory delivery timescales laid down by POFA
    In order to rely upon POFA to hold a vehicle's keeper liable for unpaid parking charges, an operator must deliver a Notice to Keeper that fully complies with all of POFA’s strict requirements. I set out below a non-exhaustive list of reasons why ParkingEye’s Notice to Keeper failed to do so:

    The Provision of Freedoms Act 2012 Sch.4 Para 9 (4) (b) and Sch.4 Para 9 (5) states that:
    The notice must be given by:
    Sch.4 Para 9 (4)(b) Sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
    Sch.4 Para 9 (5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.
    The Notice to Keeper was not even issued and certainly not delivered within the relevant period as defined in Sch.4 Para 9 (5).

    Date of alleged offence was: 12 May 2017.
    Date Notice to Keeper issued: 08 June 2017 (27 days after alleged offence)
    Date received: 10 June 2017 (29 days after alleged offense)

    The Notice to Keeper was delivered outside the 14 day maximum period allowed. As such, Keeper liability cannot apply.

    (POPLA please note this 14 day period is ONLY stipulated in the POFA 2012 and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with any other 14 day period - e.g. there is a mere guideline 'target' about posting Parking Charge Notices after getting DVLA data mentioned in the BPA Code of Practice. This was the subject of an erroneous POPLA decision in July 2016. POPLA Assessor please consider ONLY the POFA for this appeal point for that is the applicable law and the Notice to Keeper has, as a matter of irrefutable fact, been delivered too late.)

    Consequently, ParkingEye has forfeited its right to use the provisions of POFA to claim unpaid parking charges from me as the vehicle’s keeper and for this reason alone, I hope that POPLA may allow my appeal.

    (Should ParkingEye try to suggest that there is any other method whereby a registered keeper can be held liable for a charge where a driver is not identified, I draw POPLA’s attention to the guidance given to operators in POPLA's 2015 Annual Report by Henry Greenslade, Chief Adjudicator in which he reminded them of a keeper's right not to name the driver whilst still not being held liable for an unpaid parking charge under Schedule 4 of POFA. Although I trust that POPLA's assessors are already very familiar with the contents of this report, for ease of reference I set out a link as follows:

    <link>

    I draw POPLA’s particular attention to the section entitled “Keeper Liability” in which Mr. Greenslade explains that:
    “There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.......
    .......... However keeper information is obtained, there is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a keeper sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver”.)

    2) ParkingEye has no standing or authority to pursue charges or to form contracts with drivers using this particular car park

    I do not believe that ParkingEye has any proprietary interest in the land such that it has no standing to make contracts with drivers in its own right, or to pursue charges for breach in its own name. In the absence of such title, ParkingEye must have assignment of rights from the landowner to pursue charges for breach in their own right, including at Court level.

    I contend that ParkingEye merely holds a basic licence to supply and maintain (non compliant) signs and to post out 'tickets' as a deterrent to car park users. I therefore require ParkingEye to provide both POPLA and myself with an unredacted, contemporaneous copy of the contract that it holds with the landowner. This is required so that I may be satisfied that this contract permits ParkingEye to make contracts with drivers in its own right and provides it with full authority to pursue charges, including a right to pursue them in Court in its own name.

    For the avoidance of doubt, a witness statement to the effect that a contract is or was in place will not be sufficient to provide the necessary detail of the contract terms (such as revenue sharing, genuine intentions of these restrictions and charges, set amounts to charge for each stated contravention, etc.). A witness statement would not comply with section 7 of the BPA Code of Practice as the definition of the services provided would not be stated in such a vague template document.

    3) ParkingEye’s signage was inadequate

    Although ParkingEye is aware that the British Parking Association Code of Practice requires that terms on car park entrance signs must be clearly readable, the signs at this site are on a green background and blend in with the surrounding tree cover.
    The original planning application (Gwynedd Council ref C13/0187/39/HY) for signs at this site was reduced from 14 signs with a white background to 7 signs with a green background. The planning application was amended to reduce the number of signs and to make the signs blend in with the surroundings.
    Excerpt from the above planning document:

    6. Conclusions:
    6.1 It is considered that the proposal in its amended form is an improvement and the number proposed is much more reasonable. Signs of dark green colour would blend in better in the area which is a rural in nature. It is not considered that the green signs would have a significant detrimental impact on the area’s visual amenities or the wider AONB.”
    <link>
    The photograph below demonstrates how perfectly the green signs blend in with the surrounding tree foliage.

    <Photo>

    In circumstances where the terms of a notice are not negotiable (as is the case with the car park signage) and where there is any ambiguity or contradiction in those terms, the rule of contra proferentem shall apply against the party responsible for writing those terms. This is confirmed within the Consumer Rights Act 2015 including:

    Paragraph 68: 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.

    Paragraph 69: Contract terms that may have different meanings.

    (1) If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail.

    4) The car park signage failed to notify the driver that ParkingEye intended to exercise its rights under POFA (subject to its compliance with the requirements of POFA) to pursue the vehicle’s keeper for the parking charge in the event that the driver did not pay the charge.

    I believe that ParkingEye’s signs did not include as a core term any condition advising the driver that ParkingEye would reserve the right under POFA to hold the vehicle’s keeper liable for the parking charge should this not be paid by the driver.

    In accordance with the rule of contra proferentem it is reasonable for the driver to conclude that ParkingEye was one of the many private parking companies that choose not to use the provisions of POFA. The car park signage simply failed to notify the driver that ParkingEye intended to exercise its rights under POFA

    Based upon the above-detailed representations, I respectfully request that my appeal is allowed.

    Yours faithfully

    Name xxxxxxx
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Jun 17, 12:42 AM
    • 50,584 Posts
    • 63,969 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 28th Jun 17, 12:42 AM
    • #7
    • 28th Jun 17, 12:42 AM
    Has your appeal got the actual photos of the green signs among the trees? You need them.

    And you can add the POPLA template as point #2, that the appellant has not been shown to be the person liable (driver) - use that template from the NEWBIES thread post #3, as previously advised.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Bpool17
    • By Bpool17 29th Jun 17, 9:25 AM
    • 6 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Bpool17
    • #8
    • 29th Jun 17, 9:25 AM
    • #8
    • 29th Jun 17, 9:25 AM
    Many thanks - Popla appeal submitted.
    • Bpool17
    • By Bpool17 19th Jul 17, 6:16 AM
    • 6 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Bpool17
    • #9
    • 19th Jul 17, 6:16 AM
    • #9
    • 19th Jul 17, 6:16 AM
    Appeal successful !

    From POPLA "Parking Eye Ltd have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge."

    Many thanks to everyone who provided advice.

    Regards,
    Bpool17
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 19th Jul 17, 10:03 AM
    • 50,584 Posts
    • 63,969 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Well done - that was a great example of a POPLA appeal for Abersoch Golf Club.

    Green signs in trees, who would think that was OK?!

    And an example for newbies, of a POPLA appeal where PE sent a 'golden ticket' (a non-POFA PCN).

    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, 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

112Posts Today

2,188Users online

Martin's Twitter