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
    • mark306
    • By mark306 4th Jul 17, 10:49 AM
    • 47Posts
    • 15Thanks
    mark306
    PCN Lee Valley Velopark - Help please
    • #1
    • 4th Jul 17, 10:49 AM
    PCN Lee Valley Velopark - Help please 4th Jul 17 at 10:49 AM
    Hi,

    So I'm the keeper of a vehicle which has received a PCN.
    This 'fine' is from ParkingEye. (This was 7 days after).

    There is a 2 hour time limit and the car was there for an extra 40 minutes.


    I understand I should first appeal to Parkingeye with this paragraph:

    '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.'



    This might sound a dumb question, but the signs were pretty clear, do I still send the email anyway ?

    Mark
Page 1
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 4th Jul 17, 10:53 AM
    • 32,794 Posts
    • 16,821 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #2
    • 4th Jul 17, 10:53 AM
    • #2
    • 4th Jul 17, 10:53 AM
    Yes.


    The idea of the blue template is to get you a POPLA code which it will if you send it unchanged
    • mark306
    • By mark306 4th Jul 17, 11:06 AM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    • #3
    • 4th Jul 17, 11:06 AM
    • #3
    • 4th Jul 17, 11:06 AM
    Ok - Done.
    • mark306
    • By mark306 10th Jul 17, 11:55 AM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    • #4
    • 10th Jul 17, 11:55 AM
    • #4
    • 10th Jul 17, 11:55 AM
    Hi,

    So I've received a response with the POPLA Ref. Do I now submit an appeal on http://www.popla.co.uk/ using post 3 on the newbies thread ?

    Thanks again.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jul 17, 3:49 PM
    • 50,050 Posts
    • 63,448 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #5
    • 10th Jul 17, 3:49 PM
    • #5
    • 10th Jul 17, 3:49 PM
    After showing us the long draft you cobble together, yes.
    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.

    • mark306
    • By mark306 10th Jul 17, 4:28 PM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    • #6
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:28 PM
    • #6
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:28 PM
    I couldn't find anyone who has had a PCN at Lee Valley Velopark but this is what I was thinking of sending:

    How does this look:


    Parking on Private Land Appeals
    PO Box 1270
    WARRINGTON
    WA4 9RL

    Dear Sir/Madam,
    Re: Parking Charge Reference number [xxxxxxx] Vehicle registration: [xxxxxxxx]
    I am the registered keeper of the above vehicle and have received the above demand from Parking Eye.
    My appeal to Parking Eye was rejected and they gave me POPLA code [xxxxxxxxx].
    The basis of my appeal is:

    1) Lack of Observation and Grace periods either side of allowed parking time
    Parking Eye’s ANPR records show no parking time, merely photos of a car driving in and out which does not discount the possibility of a double visit. It is unreasonable for this operator to record the start of ‘parking time’ as the moment of arrival in moving traffic if they in fact offer a pay and display system which the driver can only access after parking and which is when the clock in fact starts. The exit photo is not evidence of ‘parking time’ at all and has not been shown to be synchronised to the pay and display machine clock nor even to relate to the same parking event. The British Parking Association Code of Practice 13.2 is to allow a grace period.
    The BPA Code of Practice sets a MINIMUM ten minutes just to leave, not a maximum grace period all told. For the avoidance of doubt, the second 'grace' period of at least ten minutes is in addition to the separate, first 'observation period' that must be allowed to allow the time taken to arrive, find a parking bay, lock the car and go over to read & observe the signage terms.
    Kelvin Reynolds of the BPA says:
    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 (e.g. Christmas shopper queues) 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 BPA’s wording is
    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.
    With these grace periods, together with the two hour free parking, the time recorded by the APNR, the lack of observation and grace periods driver is within the allocated time. This is also a DPA breach.

    2) Parking Eye has no standing or authority to form contracts with drivers in this particular car park, nor to pursue charges.
    As this operator does not have proprietary interest in the land then I require that they produce an unredacted, contemporaneous 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. 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. Parking Eye have not demonstrated that they had authority to issue parking notices for this site on the date that the PCN was given, and they have not provided a copy of the contract which would allow me to determine my liability and/or to request cancellation of the charge. Despite my request, Parking Eye have not provided me with a copy of the contract with the landowner or on site businesses, as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

    I do not believe that the contract allows Parking Eye to charge paying visitors £100 for a system or keypad error. It is submitted that to charge for this event is highly unlikely to be a feature of the agreement with the landowner. That is why a generic, bland witness statement with a lack of definition of contraventions will NOT counter this argument.

    3) Parking Eye has given me no information about their policy with the landowner to cancel such a charge.
    Parking Eye do not own the car park and has not supplied any information about their policy with the landowner or on site businesses, to cancel such a charge. This is required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. I believe the driver may well be eligible for cancellation and Parking Eye have omitted clear information about the process for complaints including a geographical address of the landowner.
    4)The signs are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces
    The signs and the machine tariff board were contradictory and crowded with different terms, so this is not an example of ‘plain intelligible language’, contrary to the Consumer Rights Act 2015:

    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.
    It is submitted that the driver did not have a fair opportunity to read any terms involving this huge charge, which is out of all proportion and not saved by the dissimilar 'ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis' case where the terms were concise and far clearer with no tariff lists which is the primary prominent information on the board. In the Beavis case, the signs were unusually clear. The Supreme Court were keen to point out within hours of their decision that it related to that car park and those signs and facts only so it certainly does not supersede any other appeal/defence about a different car park:-
    imgur.com/a/AkMCN

    The terms appear to be displayed inadequately at the machine, where only the tariffs are in comparatively large font. I put the operator to strict proof as to the size of the wording of the terms, which seem to be no larger than .40 font size. As evidence that this is inadequate notice, Letter Height Visibility is discussed here:-
    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. However, if you…want drivers on a nearby highway to be able to see them, design your letters at 3” or even larger.''

    ''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.''

    Under Lord Denning's Red Hand Rule, the parking terms should have been simpler and effectively: 'in red letters with a red hand pointing to it' - i.e. VERY clear, concise and prominent in large lettering, as was found to be the case in the car park in 'Beavis'.
    I put this operator to strict proof of where the car was parked and how their signs appeared on that date, at that time, from the angle of the driver's perspective when parked. Equally, I require this operator to show how the entrance signs appear from a driver's seat, not stock examples of 'the sign' in isolation/close-up.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jul 17, 4:40 PM
    • 50,050 Posts
    • 63,448 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #7
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:40 PM
    • #7
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:40 PM
    The terms appear to be displayed inadequately at the machine, where only the tariffs are in comparatively large font.
    Is it a pay & display car park then? I thought you were saying it was 2 hours free?

    I wouldn't use 'Grace periods' as an argument for a 40 minute overstay.

    I would not use:

    (e.g. Christmas shopper queues)
    for Lee Valley Velopark. Makes no sense but anyway, Grace Periods don't seem worth you arguing.

    What happened when you complained to the Manager of the Velopark and asked them to cancel the PCN for you as genuine patrons at a busy time? Always do that BEFORE POPLA is tried.
    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.

    • mark306
    • By mark306 10th Jul 17, 4:49 PM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    • #8
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:49 PM
    • #8
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:49 PM
    Yes it was pay and display.

    Point taken over grace periods, 40 minutes is quite a stretch.

    Well I wasn't actually using their facilities although in-directly I was. My running club had organised a 5k race around the park and we'd paid to use a bit of their land to setup.

    I'm going to see if I can hassle them first before I submit the appeal.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jul 17, 4:54 PM
    • 50,050 Posts
    • 63,448 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #9
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:54 PM
    • #9
    • 10th Jul 17, 4:54 PM
    Sounds like you have grounds to suggest this has put your running club off ever using that facility again...rattle the cage of the Management, do that BEFORE trying 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.

    • Redx
    • By Redx 10th Jul 17, 4:57 PM
    • 15,515 Posts
    • 19,596 Thanks
    Redx
    in theory you wont get away with more than 10 minutes before and 11 minutes after, making 21 minutes grace period, although there can be exceptions , so yes 40 minutes is a stretch and a stretch to far for a popla assessor

    if it was pay and display , was 2 hours the maximum that anyone is allowed to park there ? (or was 2 hours the time paid for even though people can pay and stay for longer ?)

    if the landholder accepted a contract to park (ie: the driver paid and displayed) then using their onsite facilities is not a part of the contract unless the signs say it is

    ideally , a landholder cancellation is best , and then a strong popla appeal based on facts only , including the BPA CoP rules on landowner contracts , signage etc

    I can assure you that 99.9% of the british population are not experets on signage , and few signs actually meet the criteria required , the BEAVIS case was an exception, one that actually proves the rule

    Beavis overstayed on a free car park with good signage and a 2 hour maximum stay allowed, with no ability to stay or pay for longer
    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
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jul 17, 5:31 PM
    • 50,050 Posts
    • 63,448 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I think an extra 40 minutes for a running club using the site for a specific purpose, as granted by the management, isn't unreasonable. The managers should have put the running club's VRN on a white list as exempt, like staff VRNs are.
    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.

    • mark306
    • By mark306 10th Jul 17, 6:08 PM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    I've spoken to our running club chairman and apparently the club paid a considerable fee to use their facilities and 12 parking spaces, none of which were used. We were supposed to register our car reg with reception.

    I could tell a porky pie and say I did do that (but that doesn't sit to well with me). Or I can just state the facts and ask if they can help, which is my prefered approach.

    Will let you know how it goes.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 10th Jul 17, 6:47 PM
    • 50,050 Posts
    • 63,448 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    No, say that you were unaware of any such requirement. That's true, and not your fault. And he/she can exempt you now.

    Remind the manager of the money paid and tell them this has seriously pis*zed you all off at the running club and is putting you off ever using their facility again. Ask politely that he/she cancels this and then all will be well, and next time you will ensure that drivers are all made aware of any requirement to register a VRN to exempt it from parking charges.
    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.

    • mark306
    • By mark306 10th Jul 17, 7:46 PM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    Thanks - message sent.
    • mark306
    • By mark306 11th Jul 17, 10:59 AM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    So this was his reply. Worth persuing ?

    Thank you for sharing the information below.



    The VeloPark car park is operated and managed by Parking Eye, therefore all appeals must go directly through them.



    Prior to the event I liaised with x and advised that he had to provide all registration details in advance of the event in order to avoid them getting a fine. There wasn’t a system in place for people to come to reception on the day and enter their registration details.



    I understand that you paid £8 to use the car park but as your stated, this only entitles you to a maximum stay of 2 hours and you exceeded this by 40 minutes, therefore a fine was issued.



    I’m sorry that I can’t be of more help and I would still recommend that you appeal to Parking Eye and explain the purpose of your visit.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Jul 17, 4:47 PM
    • 50,050 Posts
    • 63,448 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Reply and say:

    Dear xxxxx,

    Thankyou for the swift acknowledgement of this complaint. I am aware of that now (the need to register my VRN in advance) but not at the time, it was not drawn to my attention and no signs told us anything different.

    I am asking you to please use the contact email/phone number in your User Manual, which I understand is issued by ParkingEye to all clients, to cancel PCNs for genuine patrons. I understand from thorough research of their horrendous business practices, that this dreadful firm will not cancel on appeal unless you support the matter. All I am asking is that you please contact them to confirm that we were patrons and to add this VRN retrospectively as exempt that day, to cancel this PCN as a one-off. This is apparently the norm with ParkingEye contracts and some sites ring them every day to cancel similar unfair charges, using the contact details provided for that purpose.

    To be clear - I have appealed but need your back up too, please.

    I hope I have misunderstood your position but if you are refusing to do this on this one occasion for us, we certainly will not use the facility again in the future. No patron expects to be fined £100 and to be then refused the basic support of the facility manager onsite, who we know (from our research about the notoriously litigious ParkingEye) can cancel these charges easily on a case by case basis, to protect patrons from being sued. That is how this awful system 'works' apparently (not that customers are informed on any sign or in any terms that they can get their PCN cancelled by onsite management).

    Maybe it hasn't been made very clear to yourselves either but contact details will be in the User Manual, in the form of a client email contact and/or phone number for this purpose.

    Please support the appeal I have already made. We have done all we can and are just asking for your support. It would be a shame to taint what was a fantastic day.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 11-07-2017 at 5:31 PM.
    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.

    • mark306
    • By mark306 11th Jul 17, 5:28 PM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    Thank-you Coupon-man (and others). I really appreciate your help on this, regardless of outcome.

    I've sent the email let's see what he comes back with...
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Jul 17, 5:32 PM
    • 50,050 Posts
    • 63,448 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I am a coupon-lady!
    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.

    • mark306
    • By mark306 11th Jul 17, 5:33 PM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    Whops ☺️ Thank you coupon-lady !
    • mark306
    • By mark306 14th Jul 17, 10:29 AM
    • 47 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    mark306
    No reply from the manager.

    I'm thinking of throwing in the towel and paying the £60.

    What do you rate my chances of getting this cancelled via a POPLA appeal ?
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

3,865Posts Today

6,437Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Shana tova umetuka - a sweet Jewish New Year to all celebrating. I won't be online the rest of t'week, as I take the time to be with family

  • Dear Steve. Please note doing a poll to ask people's opinion does not in itself imply an opinion! https://t.co/UGvWlMURxy

  • Luciana is on the advisory board of @mmhpi (we have MPs from most parties) https://t.co/n99NAxGAAQ

  • Follow Martin