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
    • alfy_
    • By alfy_ 11th Sep 17, 9:23 PM
    • 6Posts
    • 2Thanks
    alfy_
    NTK from SIP Parking Ltd (Grace period case)
    • #1
    • 11th Sep 17, 9:23 PM
    NTK from SIP Parking Ltd (Grace period case) 11th Sep 17 at 9:23 PM
    Good evening.

    Having spent a few hours reading the helpful posts on this forum, I have decided to create a thread for my circumstance.

    The story so far...my parents spent an afternoon at Prezzo restaurant but struggled to leave timely as they couldn't get the attention of a waiter or waitress as evening diners arrived. When they arrived at the car they were greeted with a PCN issued at 18:13, the ticket expired at 18:09.

    Anyhow, my parents logged an appeal immediately to SIP Parking Limited who replied by email with the following rejection:
    Please be advised that further to our rejection letter, further clarification from the Appeals Assessment Officer is below:

    "It is your responsibility to be not exceed the duration on your ticket. If you are unable to move your vehicle in the time that your vehicle is still covered you would need to either buy another ticket at the machines or use the pay by phone service."
    Having gained insight from this forum, my parents responded to this email highlighting the Code of Practice from the IPC of which SIP Parking Limited are a member. However, a response was received to say that emails would not be responded to.

    In the following weeks a NTK arrived.

    We have immediately sent an email to Prezzo requesting details of the land owner or to forward our email directly, highlighting clause 15.0 'Grace periods' of the IPC Code of Practice which states "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."

    No response has yet been received, although its only been a day!

    Based on the information in the newbies post I believe I should now send the 'Template appeal for IPC members', with a slight amendment to draw on SIP Parking ltd's non compliance to the grace period, however I assume this will still be overlooked.

    Hopefully I am on the right track and am grateful for any advise/support of this forum. Having read similar posts where grace periods were at the forefront of appeal, I see one was cancelled after contacting the land owner, the other went all the way to court...with a successful outcome.

    Many thanks in advance.
    Last edited by alfy_; 11-09-2017 at 9:31 PM.
Page 1
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 11th Sep 17, 9:40 PM
    • 33,258 Posts
    • 17,195 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #2
    • 11th Sep 17, 9:40 PM
    • #2
    • 11th Sep 17, 9:40 PM
    Yes you are on the right track


    You need to also complain to the restaurant if it was their car park


    You will have seen the futility of appeals to IPC companies, so expect it to be rejected
    • alfy_
    • By alfy_ 11th Sep 17, 10:23 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    alfy_
    • #3
    • 11th Sep 17, 10:23 PM
    • #3
    • 11th Sep 17, 10:23 PM
    Thank you.

    I have complained directly to the restaurant, although I don't think they manage the car park...was hoping they would point me in the direction of the company that do.

    As we have received the NTK I am going to amend the template response around the data they have already obtained from the DVLA without reasonable cause, due to the non compliance to grace periods. Is this the right thing to do?
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 11th Sep 17, 10:27 PM
    • 4,485 Posts
    • 2,806 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #4
    • 11th Sep 17, 10:27 PM
    • #4
    • 11th Sep 17, 10:27 PM
    As we have received the NTK I am going to amend the template response around the data they have already obtained from the DVLA without reasonable cause, due to the non compliance to grace periods. Is this the right thing to do?
    Originally posted by alfy_
    The only change needed is to change "Should you obtain" to "Should you have obtained", and it is debatable whether that change is needed.
    .
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 12th Sep 17, 8:02 AM
    • 10,202 Posts
    • 9,347 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 17, 8:02 AM
    • #5
    • 12th Sep 17, 8:02 AM
    We know that IPC PPCs don't give way on appeals usually. That's why they joined rather than BPA

    The IAS are one sided and it isn't the motorist's ! So many recommend not even appealing to them.

    So I see nothing to be lost in going in on a single point appeal based on Grace, as well as contacting the retailer and appealing in the same way to the IAS if the PPC rejects your appeal.

    I would not use the standard appeal as it opens up the opportunity for the appeals to dodge your one valid major point. Concentrate your fire on what should be a golden ticket. It would show the IAS to be completely biased if they turn down your one appeal point and they would have to explain why the IPC code of practice is irrelevant.
    • Half_way
    • By Half_way 12th Sep 17, 10:15 AM
    • 3,840 Posts
    • 5,411 Thanks
    Half_way
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:15 AM
    • #6
    • 12th Sep 17, 10:15 AM
    was this the restuarants car park?
    From the Plain Language Commission:

    "The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"
    • alfy_
    • By alfy_ 12th Sep 17, 11:40 AM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    alfy_
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:40 AM
    • #7
    • 12th Sep 17, 11:40 AM
    No this wasn't the restaurants car park, I believe it is managed by Urban Splash, I have emailed both of them with no response yet.

    Thanks for your response and advice 'guys dad', if I have understood you correctly you are suggesting a better approach would be to respond to the NTK with the simple fact that they haven't complied with the grace periods set by the IPC, and to confirm why.
    If they still reject this appeal, then raise the appeal via the IAS. Is it worth going ahead and doing this now or draw out the process and wait for the PPC to respond first?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Sep 17, 12:06 PM
    • 15,523 Posts
    • 24,245 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #8
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:06 PM
    • #8
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:06 PM
    The PPC has to reject your initial appeal after which they offer you the opportunity to appeal further to the IAS.

    I think a single point appeal on Grace Periods, as suggested by Guy's Dad, will put the IAS on the spot. Just made sure you work within each of the deadlines for the initial appeal and then for the IAS appeal, to ensure they don't wriggle off the hook.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 12th Sep 17, 12:59 PM
    • 851 Posts
    • 971 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #9
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:59 PM
    • #9
    • 12th Sep 17, 12:59 PM
    We rarely advise appealing to the IAS, as they reject at least 85% of appeals. they advertise this to their members!

    So IF you are appealing to the IAS, after appealing to the company, make damned sure you know exactly what the grace periods for IPC do and do not mean. They have more get outs than the BPA CoP from memory.
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 12th Sep 17, 1:40 PM
    • 10,202 Posts
    • 9,347 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    We rarely advise appealing to the IAS, as they reject at least 85% of appeals. they advertise this to their members!

    So IF you are appealing to the IAS, after appealing to the company, make damned sure you know exactly what the grace periods for IPC do and do not mean. They have more get outs than the BPA CoP from memory.
    Originally posted by nosferatu1001
    That's correct. The 10 minute period you refer to is NOT in their Code of Practice. What it says is "15.2 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired."

    Your argument is that 4 minutes must be considered as reasonable. As Umkomaas says, it puts them firmly on the spot and could stand you in good stead should it reach court.

    If it did reach court, the fact that the IPC do NOT specify a Grace period is easily dealt with by quoting what the other assocoation (the BPA) states
    "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."


    Now any court will take that into consideration and should determine why the other mob refuse to accept 4 minutes, let alone 10 and how would any reasonable motorist be expected to know the different "rules".

    In this case, it is definitely worth going through the double appeal process because, if handled properly, they have no wriggle room with other generic appeal point distractions.

    And as I say, both the PPC and the IAS would normally reject any appeal, so you have nothing to lose.
    • alfy_
    • By alfy_ 12th Sep 17, 7:17 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    alfy_
    Thank you all for your continued support.

    Is the link to the IPC Code of Practice not the one available on their website (sorry I can't post links)?

    Which includes the following...
    15. Grace Periods
    15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
    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.
    15.3 The reference to 10 minutes in 15.2 above shall not apply where the period of pre-paid or permitted parking does not exceed 1 hour providing that the signage on the site makes it clear to the motorist, in a prominent font, that no grace period applies on that land.
    As suggested, I will respond to the NTK with specific focus on the fact that the Accredited Operator Scheme that they are a part of states they must allow a minimum period of 10 minutes for the driver to leave the site.

    Should I draw onto the reasons why the driver wasn't at the car at the time the ticket was issued?
    Last edited by alfy_; 12-09-2017 at 7:29 PM.
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 12th Sep 17, 7:38 PM
    • 10,202 Posts
    • 9,347 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    Thank you all for your continued support.

    Is the link to the IPC Code of Practice not the one available on their website (sorry I can't post links)?

    Which includes the following...
    15. Grace Periods
    15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
    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.
    15.3 The reference to 10 minutes in 15.2 above shall not apply where the period of pre-paid or permitted parking does not exceed 1 hour providing that the signage on the site makes it clear to the motorist, in a prominent font, that no grace period applies on that land.
    As suggested, I will respond to the NTK with specific focus on the fact that the Accredited Operator Scheme that they are a part of states they must allow a minimum period of 10 minutes for the driver to leave the site.

    Should I draw onto the reasons why the driver wasn't at the car at the time the ticket was issued?
    Originally posted by alfy_
    Apologies- I linked to an old version of the code when they were called the Independent Parking Committee.

    No, you need not explain why the driver overstayed. Just quote the code on Grace and leave it at that. Don't raise any other point or give them anything else to divert their response on.

    Let us know how you get on, remembering that 90% of IPC appeals fail at PPC & IAS level. Yours should be in the winning 10%.
    • alfy_
    • By alfy_ 12th Sep 17, 8:19 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    alfy_
    Below is the main body of my response...

    As per the information provided by you, the parking ticket associated to this parking charge notice (PCN) expired at 18:09, with the PCN issued at 18:13, providing the driver with only 4 minutes to leave the site.

    As a member of the International Parking Community you have violated the Code of Conduct for which it is a requirement for Operators to comply with, mainly ‘Part B, 15.0 Grace Periods’. I have included an extract below.

    [Insert extract]

    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.

    I would ask that you take the necessary steps to cancel this ticket.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 12th Sep 17, 8:35 PM
    • 15,523 Posts
    • 24,245 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days.
    Not quite sure what you're asking of them here.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • alfy_
    • By alfy_ 12th Sep 17, 9:20 PM
    • 6 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    alfy_
    Poor copy and paste on my part, apologies... it was taken from the template on the newbies post, I missed the paragraph immediately before. Is it worth including?

    Whilst there is a chance they might not even read my letter, I want them to know that I am fully committed to seeing this all the way through. Should we end up in court, I will ensure I am fully prepared, which includes having a breakdown of costs that I would look to recover.

    In fact, as they have obtained vehicle keeper data from the DVLA whilst in violation of the IPC's CoP, haven't they therefore breached their KADOE contract with the DVLA. Perhaps I include a paragraph as follows;
    You have, therefore, obtained my personal information without reasonable cause. This is a clear breach of data protection principles 1 and 2 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). Your unreasonable and unlawful demand for payment is causing me significant distress and anxiety.

    I demand that you immediately cease and desist from processing my personal data, except to inform me that you have complied with this demand. Any further processing of my personal data, including demands for payment or passing my personal data to any third party, will be considered harassment and a flagrant disregard of the DPA, which will be reported to DVLA and to your ATA, and may result in legal action against you for compensation or damages, including Exemplary or Punitive damages.

    I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. The DPA requires you to respond to this notice within 21 days to confirm that you have or will comply with my demands, or to explain why you have not or will not comply
    Last edited by alfy_; 12-09-2017 at 9:23 PM.
    • Guys Dad
    • By Guys Dad 12th Sep 17, 9:46 PM
    • 10,202 Posts
    • 9,347 Thanks
    Guys Dad
    Now you haven't asked them to cancel ticket in the revised version! You have now opened a new avenue for them to reply to and downplay your genuine Grace point.

    Stop trying to be over clever. Keep it simple. Get it cancelled and get on with your life.
    Last edited by Guys Dad; 12-09-2017 at 10:40 PM.
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

2,750Posts Today

9,109Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Sadly for those buying jointly "Where there are joint purchasers, all purchasers would need to be first-time buyers. "

  • First time buyers usually defined as someone who has never owned or part owned a property https://t.co/yM3urZNs8z

  • You will not pay stamp duty https://t.co/vHoCWiUXfo

  • Follow Martin