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
    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 16th Oct 17, 8:12 PM
    • 8Posts
    • 1Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    Maidencombe Beach - Park With Ease PCN sent after 57 days
    • #1
    • 16th Oct 17, 8:12 PM
    Maidencombe Beach - Park With Ease PCN sent after 57 days 16th Oct 17 at 8:12 PM
    I have just received a PCN notice to keeper from Park with Ease sent 57 days after an alleged incident of Non Payment of Parking in a car park at Maidencombe Beach.

    I have been advised by someone who was in the car at the time that the car park in question had ANPR recording and there was a payment machine in which the person paying the parking charge on exit needed to enter the registration number of the car.

    After such a lengthy period of time they cannot recall anything regarding signage in the car park or if the machine issued a ticket or not, but they are certain that the parking charge was paid in cash on this occasion, so there is no receipt available through debit/credit card accounts. They also confirm that the person who was driving the car on this occasion cannot add any further information/clarification to their recollections after such a period of time.

    There is no reference to POFA on the Notice to Keeper, they indicate that the information from DVLA was obtained in accordance with the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002.

    Does anybody have any information regarding this company or this particular car park, as both seem to have limited info available from searches I have conducted on the internet?

    I have read the Newbie threads and prepared the proposed response (below). Is there anything else I need to add, or anything that I need to adjust before responding to their request?

    Thanks in anticipation of your support in this matter.


    Dear Sirs

    Re: Parking Charge – Notice to Keeper (Your reference XXX XXX XXX)

    I respond to this 'PCN' as the keeper of the car XXX XXX XXX

    There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You have failed POFA2012 due to late delivery of the NTK, and therefore no transfer of liability to the Registered Keeper is possible, if you are unable to obtain payment from the driver of the car.

    Whilst my liability as the Registered Keeper has not been established, because you have failed to comply with the conditions set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act, I must sadly decline your invitation to pay the unpaid parking charge. However, as a gesture of goodwill, with evidence and/or proof from you of who was driving the car I would be prepared do my best to service this charge. Unfortunately, without this, it is not possible for me to do so.

    Upon receipt of your proof of who was driving the car, in order to make an informed decision whether to assist you in serving this charge I require the following information:

    1. Who is the party that contracted with your company and are they the landowner?
    2. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
    3. Please provide photos of the signs that you say were on site, which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
    4. Please provide confirmation if and when appropriate planning permission has been granted for the signage used for this parking site.
    5. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle.
    6. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera or timer used was synchronised with all other cameras and/or systems & machines, including the dates and times of when the cameras at this car park were checked, adjusted, calibrated, synchronised with the timer which stamps the photos and generally maintained to ensure the accuracy of the dates and times of any ANPR images, and by whom.
    7. Please provide a copy of any records or information, which confirms the Manufacturers' stated % reliability of the exact ANPR system used on this site.
    8. If this site used any ANPR systems linked to payment machines, please provide confirmation of all registration numbers of cars that made payments on this site from 7th – 9th August 2017
    9. Please provide a copy of any V888/3 or other forms used to request keeper details in respect of this vehicle and/or the vehicle Keeper at Date of Event (KADOE) contract with DVLA.

    Should you wish to persist in pursuing my liability as the keeper of the vehicle I would wish to appeal further - and will do so if you make available an ADR service that is transparent in its operation, independent and seen to be independent, with an independent scrutiny board, and compliant with Schedule 3 of the Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Disputes (Competent Authorities and Information) Regulations 2015. Otherwise I am under no obligation to appeal a speculative invoice, and any court case brought by you will be robustly defended

    Should you have obtained 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 any Data Protection Act breach.

    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.

    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.

    In summary, I do not give you consent to process data relating to this vehicle or me. 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.



    Last edited by Ice Ice Baby; 17-10-2017 at 4:43 PM. Reason: missing n in the word number
Page 1
    • Redx
    • By Redx 16th Oct 17, 8:18 PM
    • 16,937 Posts
    • 21,072 Thanks
    Redx
    • #2
    • 16th Oct 17, 8:18 PM
    • #2
    • 16th Oct 17, 8:18 PM
    never seen that car park mentioned before (seen many other beach ones though , usually BPA members like in Newquay)

    doesnt really matter as the circumstances are typical and also the people involved tend to have thrown their receipt away meaning they have a harder hill to climb when they have no evidence

    this link explains the irresponsibility of throwing away the contractual receipts obtained from cash parking meters

    http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/team-blog/2017/05/30/throwing-pay-display-ticket-away-use-cost-100/


    yes use the IPC black text template , but its a paper excercise only as they are unlikely to cancel (there is no profit in upholding an appeal) - this is not about parking per se, its about extorting the maximum amount of money out of people making simple mistakes (was on RIP OFF BRITAIN on the bbc this morning)

    as they have failed POFA2012 then the KEEPER is not liable (but that wont stop them pursuing and harassing said keeper)
    Last edited by Redx; 18-10-2017 at 10:19 AM.
    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
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 16th Oct 17, 10:04 PM
    • 15,956 Posts
    • 24,760 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #3
    • 16th Oct 17, 10:04 PM
    • #3
    • 16th Oct 17, 10:04 PM
    Please bang some paragraphs into any further posts you make.

    Walls of text don’t get regulars particularly interested in unravelling them - we’ve enough headaches - and you miss out on valuable advice.
    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.
    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 17th Oct 17, 4:45 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    • #4
    • 17th Oct 17, 4:45 PM
    • #4
    • 17th Oct 17, 4:45 PM
    Done.

    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 18th Oct 17, 9:44 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    • #5
    • 18th Oct 17, 9:44 AM
    • #5
    • 18th Oct 17, 9:44 AM
    Finally found some information about the car park!!

    The car park is owned by The Torbay Coast and Countryside Trust, which owns about five small car parks in the Torquay Area.

    Contact details are:

    Torbay Coast and Countryside Trust, Occombe Farm, Preston Down Road, Paignton,TQ3 1RN
    Tel No: 01803 520 022

    Staff details are: Director: Damian Offer and Business and Commercial Manager: Andy Leonard-Myers

    In addition to appealing to staff, as this is a trust, it may also be possible to appeal to the Trustees of the Trust if there are concerns about the way their staff are performing.
    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 23rd Oct 17, 5:06 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    • #6
    • 23rd Oct 17, 5:06 AM
    • #6
    • 23rd Oct 17, 5:06 AM
    Article in "We are South Devon"(Last Updated on: June 23, 2017) reported that: "In recent weeks Torbay Coast and Countryside Trust has been working with newly appointed car park managers Park with Ease Ltd, to install a new ‘pay on exit’ parking system across all their Torbay sites".

    Overall, the Trust felt that "this new system is a fairer way for visitors to contribute to the care of the sites they manage" and were generally pleased with this new arrangement.

    However, in the article Damian Offer, Director of Torbay Coast and Countryside Trust said:

    “Whilst we are experiencing some initial teething problems, we are addressing them with Park with Ease as quickly as we are able to. There is a learning curve for the Trust in the operation of the new system and the new machines, and we ask customers to bear with us. I would like to apologise to anyone experiencing problems during this early period of operating the new system and assure you that it will improve."

    "New parking signage, to supplement that already installed by Park with Ease, is also planned across the Trust’s car parks as well as investment in simple shelters/shades for some of the machines where direct sunlight is hampering the visibility of the screens".

    "The Trust is keen to reassure its valued visitors and supporters that the issues reported are being addressed as they are brought to our attention and the new system will be fully operational as quickly as possible".

    Information that may possibly be useful if this matter proceeds to court perhaps?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 23rd Oct 17, 10:27 AM
    • 15,956 Posts
    • 24,760 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #7
    • 23rd Oct 17, 10:27 AM
    • #7
    • 23rd Oct 17, 10:27 AM
    Article in "We are South Devon"(Last Updated on: June 23, 2017) reported that: "In recent weeks Torbay Coast and Countryside Trust has been working with newly appointed car park managers Park with Ease Ltd, to install a new ‘pay on exit’ parking system across all their Torbay sites".
    Are there barriers installed, lifted only by the correct payment? I bet not; no profits in barriers for parking cowboys (so described in Parliament).
    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.
    • IamEmanresu
    • By IamEmanresu 23rd Oct 17, 10:30 AM
    • 1,819 Posts
    • 3,214 Thanks
    IamEmanresu
    • #8
    • 23rd Oct 17, 10:30 AM
    • #8
    • 23rd Oct 17, 10:30 AM
    Suggest you get onto the Trust, point out their admission of the failures of PWE and get them to cancel.

    Or you could be blunter and point out that PWE have been screwing the Trust's visitors and you have no intention of being turned over.
    Life's for living, get on with it rather than worrying about these. If they hassle, counter claim.

    Send them that costs schedule though, 24 hours before the hearing, and file it with the court. Take with you evidence that you have sent the costs schedule to them and when.
    LoC
    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 27th Oct 17, 5:46 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    • #9
    • 27th Oct 17, 5:46 AM
    • #9
    • 27th Oct 17, 5:46 AM
    Surprise, surprise - Park with Ease (PWE) declined the request to stop pursuing me as the registered keeper, and have not responded to any of the requests that were made of them for information/clarification. They have also not replied to the section 10 DPA notice so far.

    Interestingly the robo-form response from PWE seems to combine a response to driver and response to keeper, implying that both are one and the same despite my letter to them stating "no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn"

    Their response.included the statement "We have not claimed to and are not seeking to use POFS 2012 to pursue the matter, therefore we have no requirement to issue any letters within 14 days".

    This seems to be supported by The IPC Cop which states it offers Clarification on the position where the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is not relied upon - but it only makes reference to this in the section relating to Scotland and Northern Ireland under the heading "Applying for keeper details where keeper liability is not sought".

    This section says that where members apply for keeper details outside of the provisions of the Protection of Freedoms Act the strict time limits and pre-conditions under schedule 4 of the Act do not apply.

    Elsewhere In respect of Keeper Liability, the IPC Cop states "Where a parking charge remains unpaid and the keeper has failed to identify the driver within 28 days of the notice to keeper, you should send a notification letter to the keeper confirming they are now liable for the charge"

    I can understand that it suits PWE to presume (rather than prove) that the Registered Keeper and the driver of the vehicle are the same person, and that, they may have made an application outside of POFA in order to justify requesting Keeper information from DVLA - but surely this prevents the transference of liability to the keeper as suggested by the IPC CoP?

    Is this analysis correct?

    I am putting together an appeal to IAS, but will be looking to complain to PWE about their response and I will include reference to this in the complaint I am formulating to the Owner of the land.



    The rejection letter from PWE:

    Thank you for your email

    Upon entering the site you entered into a contract to pay for the parking that was due at the time or up to 48 hours following your departure (online) or pay a parking charge notice (reduced if paid within 14 days).

    We have invited you to inform us who the driver at the time was. We do have images of the vehicle entering the site and should we need to we may choose to get the images enhanced in order to present them as evidence in court should you choose to allow the matter get that far.

    We have not claimed to and are not seeking to use POFA 2012 to pursue the matter, therefore we have no requirement to issue any letters within 14 days.

    Since you failed to pay for the parking that was due at the time or up to 48 hours following your departure the parking charge notice has been issued correctly.

    We have no requirement to send any evidence at this time.

    You can pay your parking charge notice online at XXX_XXX_XXXX or by sending a cheque or postal order to Park With Ease, Unit F, The Court, Kestrel Road, Trafford Park, Manchester, M17 1SF.

    The Independent Appeals Service (XXX.XXX.XXX) provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. As you have complied with our internal appeals procedure you may use, and we will engage with, the IAS Standard Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal to them within 21 days of this rejection.

    If you believe this decision is incorrect, you are entitled to appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS). In order to appeal the IAS will need your parking charge number, your vehicle registration and the date the charge was originally issued.

    Please note, the 14 day reduced period is not held whilst an appeal is in place.

    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 27th Oct 17, 5:49 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    Are there barriers installed, lifted only by the correct payment? I bet not; no profits in barriers for parking cowboys (so described in Parliament).
    Originally posted by Umkomaas
    You win your bet.

    • StaffsSW
    • By StaffsSW 27th Oct 17, 9:43 AM
    • 5,383 Posts
    • 5,423 Thanks
    StaffsSW
    I've recently spoken to somebody else about this same location, and based their appeal on non-compliance with POFA in regards to timescales.

    It went to IAS, but PWE didn't respond to the IAS appeal, so it was granted in favour of of the keeper.
    <--- Nothing to see here - move along --->
    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 27th Oct 17, 9:54 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    Thanks for the heads up on this - that is quite heartening. They did not give you a copy of the IAS appeal they submitted did they?

    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 27th Oct 17, 10:38 AM
    • 15,956 Posts
    • 24,760 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    It went to IAS, but PWE didn't respond to the IAS appeal, so it was granted in favour of of the keeper.
    A rare bird indeed.
    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.
    • StaffsSW
    • By StaffsSW 27th Oct 17, 11:06 AM
    • 5,383 Posts
    • 5,423 Thanks
    StaffsSW
    Thanks for the heads up on this - that is quite heartening. They did not give you a copy of the IAS appeal they submitted did they?

    Originally posted by Ice Ice Baby
    I saw it, but don't have a copy - the first point of appeal was the POFA dates and how they didn't comply with paragraph 9, but the usual inadequate signage, land owner authority templated points were in there as well, most of which were copied from other appeals he lifted from these threads.
    <--- Nothing to see here - move along --->
    • Ice Ice Baby
    • By Ice Ice Baby 2nd Dec 17, 11:57 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Ice Ice Baby
    I received Reminder to Keeper which was a badly cut and pasted mock up of the original Notice to Keeper - and which appeared tooter the opportunity to appeal to IAS again.

    Although I had decided not to pursue IAS appeal, the route was not open for this reminder, despite it indicating there were 28 days to do so.

    I have drafted a further response to PWE as follows, which I think provides me with a vehicle to invoice them for current and future communications, as well as seeking punitive damages if this matter gets as far as court. Is it OK?

    Dear Sirs
    Re: Parking Charge – Reminder (Your reference XXX XXXXX)

    Further to my earlier communications on this matter, Given the receipt of your further, rather poor quality cut and paste, communication, I feel it necessary to be clear that: at this time, as the registered Keeper of the vehicle XXX XXX, I reject your Parking Charge Notice as an unsolicited and speculative invoice and that any alleged debt is denied.

    I note your statement that the pursuit of this matter is not based upon the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. However your request to DVLA for keeper details was made within POFA timescales, despite the lengthy period that elapsed before you chose to serve your original Notice to Keeper. I note that, by not pursuing this matter through POFA, you appear to have acted outside the guidance of your own professional Association, as well as possibly breaching the terms of the Keeper at Date of Event (KADOE) contract your company has with DVLA.

    Your original Notice to Keeper letter does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 as it was not served within the 14 days as required under Schedule 4 of the Act. As such, no transfer of liability for the parking Charge to the Registered Keeper is possible, if you are unable to obtain payment from the driver of the vehicle, and you must now take the matter up with the driver. Consequently, as the Registered Keeper of the above vehicle I do not require any further communications from yourself, other than to confirm that you are ceasing any further pursuit of the parking charge from myself.

    As a result of your failure to comply with POFA timescales there is no legal obligation for me to name the driver. In addition, on the basis of your approach to date in respect of this matter, I see no moral reason to hand over a colleague, friend or family member to be harassed by your parking company, and I decline to do so.

    At this time you have not furnished any proof that the vehicle was parked at the Maidencombe Beach car park site, or that there was the breach of any contract or grounds to seek damages that justifies your issuing of a parking charge notice.

    Whilst I note you claim that grounds exist for you to issue a parking charge notice for non-payment of a parking charge, I note from my research that there are several occasions where your company has made similar claims to others who had actually paid the required fee for parking at that time - but your company’s ANPR/computerised systems failed to properly and accurately record and/or register such payments. You have not offered any proof that your systems at this car park were accurate and working correctly at the time of this alleged incident.

    In the absence of any additional information from yourselves and, on the basis of other information and photographs I have recently received regarding this car park, I believe that your signage at this location does not meet the standards to support any legal claim for payment, or meet those required by your professional organisation.

    Furthermore, you have not furnished any proof that your organisation has a legal basis to request any payment in respect the Maidencombe Beach car park site, you have not provided any proof that you are the landowner of the site, or that you have any mandate or legal agreement to act on behalf of the landowner in this matter.

    I originally asked that you made available access to an ADR service that was transparent in its operation, independent, with a independent scrutiny board, and seen to be compliant with Schedule 3 of the Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Disputes (Competent Authorities and Information) Regulations 2015. Your Independent Appeals service (AIS) fails to meet these criteria at this time.

    Currently you have failed to demonstrate any grounds you have to legitimately require any payments from me, and I reject your current speculative invoice in entirety. Consequently, I will not pursue the appeal course of action, as there is currently nothing to appeal and, even if there were, there is no adequate ADR facility to pursue such an option.

    Should you continue to pursue me with your current frivolous and vexatious claim I would advise that I will seek reimbursement for the costs that I incur in receiving, processing and responding to any future communications from you regarding this matter, as well as any additional costs that I may incur should you choose to take this matter to court. To date, on the basis of an hourly rate of £19.00 per hour, I estimate that these costs amount to the sum of £95.00, although I would expect them to become significantly much more should you choose to continue with this matter. I am prepared to waive any costs incurred by myself to date should you agree to cease this matter within 28 days of receipt of this communication, but will accept any continued communications from yourselves or your agents as proof of your acceptance these terms.

    Your continuing behaviour in this matter is causing myself and my family considerable distress, and you do not have reasonable cause to hold my data on your system. In my original response (of 18th October 2017) to you I requested your immediate cessation of any further processing of my personal data or any passing of this data to any third party, except to inform me of your compliance with this request. I also clearly stated that you needed to consider that letter as formal Notice under Section 10 of the DPA.

    The letter acted as a Formal Section 10 Notification and you should have passed it on to your Data Controller. In addition, you have failed to respond to the notice within 21 days to confirm that you had or would comply with the notice and that you would remove my data from your systems and that of your agents - or to explain why you had not/would not comply. I further reminded you of your legal obligation under the Data Protection Act in my subsequent e-mail to you on. Clearly your disregard of this notice and continuing harassment of myself constitutes a flagrant disregard of the DPA which I intend to report to the ICO. This may result in sanctions being taken out against you, including suspension of your licence as a Data Controller. This could have an adverse effect on your business.


    I now 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 any organisation that has contracted your services in this matter, the DVLA, your ATA, and it may also result in a request that any future legal award of costs to myself against you considers compensation or damages, including Exemplary or Punitive damages.

    I have kept proof of submission of this communication to you. I now consider this matter closed. Do not write to me again, save to confirm your compliance with the Section 10 Notification.


    .

    Yours faithfully,


    The Registered Keeper
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

453Posts Today

2,692Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @bearface83: @MartinSLewis check out the @Missguided new 60% off offer. Upping the cost of items almost double to make us think it?s a?

  • RT @efitzpat: Thank you SO SO much @MartinSLewis for your Student Loans refund advice! I just got a grand refunded right before Xmas! Whoop?

  • Have a lovely weekend folks. Don't do anything (fiscally) that I wouldn't do!

  • Follow Martin