Parking Ticket Appeals successes and failures

musiccinders

I was fined on private land (supermarket car park) for outstaying the 2hour time limit. Whilst I did indeed outstay the limit, I did feel that the charge of £85 was disproportionate as parking there is free!

I used the template letter arguing that the contract agreement is unfair and included a copy of my receipt from the supermarket proving that I was shopping there during that time. I sent this to both the company that had issued the fine and the assistant manager at the supermarket (I did the latter in person).

To add strength to my arguement, I also used the council car parking charges for comparison (65p an hour) and made it known that I was a loyal customer who shopped there every week, which I do.

To my delight, I received an email this morning stating that the fine has been waived. I am overjoyed as the fine could not have come at a worse time! :j
Thank you so much MSE - brilliant once again!!:T

trisontana

I hoped you didn't actually use the word "fine".

blairpoodle

Last week I received a PCN ticket for "not having a valid Resident Permit". I phoned the council who said that it WAS valid but I would have to contest it on the Council website. I did.
Next day I get another ticket - same place, same reason, except this time the jobsworth writes "not valid according to NSL database" on the back. Another call to Camden Council; another wasted 30 mins contesting it online and another 30 mins writing an angry letter to Head of Parking and local councilor. They are now "investigating" and have kindly cancelled both tickets. Its a clear no-brainer that the Council database has been reconciled to the outsourced parking services provider NSL.

I have been advised to write a solicitor's letter to pursue compensation from the Council but have no idea whether it is worth the money. I'm not interested in the cash so much as making the point that someone should be accountable for gross incompetence. I suspect that I don't have a leg to stand on, given that the whole parking penalty Ponzi scheme is just a one-way street designed for fund raising, but I'd appreciate any thoughts.

Paul

llywmog

I received an excess charge notice from LPS regarding an invalid ticket. I had purchased a ticket from a council run machine nearest to my car unaware that there were two car parks and that I was parked in a private one (they appear to be the same). I only became aware of this after the parking attendant had kindly pointed this out via a scribbled note on the reverse of the notice.

Not wanting to face a year of dreaded invoices/threats, I emailed LPS explaining that I had purchased a ticket (and included a scan of the council machine ticket as proof), and stated that even if I had broken any contract, I should only have been charged for the two hours I stayed (thanks must go to the MSE letter for providing most of the text in my email).

I received a reply from LPS within 24 hours. They reiterated the situation with two machines for two separate car parks, but kindly cancelled the charge.

From my situation at least, perhaps there's no harm in appealing (as long as you don't leave your address on the email). If they reject it, ignore any further correspondence. In my case, they accepted and now I no longer have to worry (because many of us naturally would, even if we were encouraged not to and were convinced nothing would happen).

Cheers again to MSE and comments on this forum for helping me out with this one.

Coupon-mad

blairpoodle wrote: »

I have been advised to write a solicitor's letter to pursue compensation from the Council but have no idea whether it is worth the money. I'm not interested in the cash so much as making the point that someone should be accountable for gross incompetence.

Paul

I wouldn't bother with a solicitor's letter as it costs you money - why bother when there is an Ombudsman scheme for free?

I would complain in writing to the Head of the Council and get to the end of their complaints procedure. Then they have to give you the details of the Local Authorities' Ombudsman scheme which you can invoke for free by filling in an online form.

The Ombudsman does have the power to order a small payment for compansation where appropriate but don't hold your breath.

However it does cost the Council a pretty penny for each Ombudman complaint (whether or not they are upheld) so it's in the Council's interests to resolve your complaint now, if you make it clear where it's going to go if they fail.

VictoryIsMine

I was issued a PCN by Bath and North East Somerset (BANES) Council at the beginning of January this year. I parked my motorcycle in an area adjacent to the designated m/c bay in the underground section of a two-tiered council car-park in Manvers Street. It had identical floor markings (yellow cross-hatching) to the designated bay and was in an area not obstructing vehicles nor pedestrians.

I was told I could park there on a previous visit in December, I pointed out the "No Parking" sign on the adjacent wall to the Civil Enforcement officer (CEO) I spoke to and he told me it was for the benefit of cars. I parked there with no problems in December.

On my visit in January I again parked on the extended cross-hatched area, again because the designated m/c bay was full. As I was locking the bike up, a female CEO walked right past me, within ten feet and looked at me before carrying on up the stairs to the ground floor level. After I had finished stowing my gear and locking everything up I also went up the stairs and saw the same CEO standing near the ticket machine. I went over to her and asked her if I was ok to park where I was as I wanted to be sure i wouldn't get ticketed because I felt that the signage was a bit ambiguous. She said I was ok where I was.

A couple of hours later I returned to my bike and found a PCN on it stating that I was parked outside of the designated area! You can understand that I was not at all happy!

BANES Council offices are directly opposite the car park so I went in and with considerable control explained my dissatisfaction. Long story short - all they could do was help me fill out a form to challenge the PCN and sent it off for me.

A few days later I received a letter stating that my challenge was unsuccessful and that I still had 14 days to pay the reduced fine or i could go to the next level of challenge.

Before I challenged higher I wanted information from the Council about the CEO with whom i had spoken because I was sure that she would confirm her telling me I was parked correctly and I would be relying on her testimony to succeed in the next challenge.

Eventually BANES Council traced her and although she recalled speaking to me she denied knowing where I was parked! (Remember she looked at me securing the bike as she walked right past me!).

I couldn't believe it! Was this a conspiracy? Was she trying to raise their hit rate? Was she just very forgetful? I was very angry!

My defence had just evaporated into thin air so I could see no point in continuing to challenge the PCN. I paid the reduced fine of £25 on day 13 rather than end up paying £50.

But I wasn't going to let it lie. If I was going to be held to ransom by a lying, cheating and swindling bureaucracy then I would have my pound of flesh in return. I e-mailed BANES Council and made an official complaint against the CEO.

I soon had a reply from the Council who were very concerned about my complaint and asked for a contact phone number so that their parking services manager could talk to me about it.

I had the phone call and described what happened as I have told you here. He could see why I was not happy. He promised to investigate the matter and get back to me. Much to my surprise, he did! He assured me that their CEOs were not on any sort of bonus scheme nor had they targets to meet. He kind of glossed over the testimony of the CEO and concentrated more on the fact that the parking bay and adjacent area were not very distinctly marked and were admittedly confusing.

He said that although his department did not receive the fines themselves he would call someone who did and ask that my fine be reimbursed.

About a week later I had a call from BANES Council asking for a bank account to pay the money into.

Success!

I will still ask for a written outcome to my formal complaint as I want to know what action has been taken, either against the lying CEO, to re-mark the motorcycle bay properly or to re-brief the CEOs as to what is and in not a legitimate parking area.

It pays to be persistent. If more people pursued justice in these cases then the bureaucrats will not always win.

Coupon-mad

BANES Council includes a blioke called David Bellotti. That's enough reason for a Brighton fan like me to hate and detest that Council.

'Build a bonfire'. :cool::)

SamSung

I got a nasty letter from bailiffs today, asking for £125 within 7 days.

I managed to get parking ticket last year in october.

But, what i want to know is, the DVLA registered my name wrong by one letter (in my last name starts with V but they put in Y), since then the car has been sold ( had it for 2 months only ), do i need to pay this fine or not? As they dont have my full name correct?

And the letter is addressed to Y person not V

pogofish

You really need to start your own thread. This one is for discussing the outcome of challenges.

MLD290

My wife received a parking charge notice in November 2012 for parking on a supermarket car park which had just recently started using a car park management company. The car park had notices put up and it was monitored by a CCTV system which took pictures of cars entering and exiting the car park along with the time and date stamp.

She had parked at 7 pm and then returned at 10:30 pm. The first hour on the car park was free (to customers). The store closed at 9 pm. When she arrived the weather was thick fog and she failed to see, or even look for the recently erected signs as she had used it on a couple of previous occasions and was unaware of the changes. The area was not local to her.

The parking charge was for £70 (£35 if paid within 14 days). I used the template letter on Martins site and outlined the reasons above along with an expressed opinion that the 'charge' was excessive in comparison to the loss incurred by the landowner. At worst I outlined that they had been deprived of 1 hour of customer parking before they closed (1st hour was free) and had my wife been in and bought a single item of cheap merchandise she would have had a valid hour of parking in any case. I also pointed out that the cost of parking in the city centre was only £5 for the entire day and failed to see how they arrived at the amount that they did.

I sent off her appeal and the company sent back asking for more evidence. I sent a weather report from a website which showed local weather conditions for the area and outlined the Met. Offices' definition of 'Thick fog' which the weather conditions were recorded as meeting. I also asked for a copy of the maintenance log for the equipment used to record my wife's car entering and leaving the car park, along with proof of the method of calibration to ensure that the time and date were in sync with GMT (like you can do with CCTV footage on bus lanes). I also told them that I knew they were entirely biased and reminded them to send their cheque for £34 to POPLA when they registered her formal appeal with them as I intended to go to the next stage because I knew they would refuse her appeal. (I just wanted to upset them by this point!)

A few weeks later they replied and gave a stock answer about meeting all the industry standards and asked for more evidence. They 'generously' gave her a further 14 days to furnish them with further evidence. I ignored them, just like they had me.

In July this year we received their decision and the paperwork which they had sent to POPLA. It stated their case and outlined why they felt their cost was proportionate. They are required to send a copy of all the paperwork to the appellant and it was at least an inch thick!

Today (September 2013) my wife received an email with a copy of POPLA's decision. WE WON!

The adjudicator acknowledged that my wife did not dispute that she had parked in the car park. They also noted that the question of proportionate costs had been raised. The reams of papers showing why the company felt their charge was fair was not accepted by the adjudicator. Their reasoning was:

"The parking charge appears to be a sum sought for liquidated damages, in other words, compensation agreed in advance. Accordingly, the charge must represent a genuine pre-estimate of the loss any breach may cause. The onus is on the Operator to prove its case on the balance of probabilities. Accordingly, once an Appellant submits that the parking charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, the onus is on the Operator to produce some explanation or evidence to tip the balance in its favour. The operator has produced a statement which it submits justifies the charge as a pre-estimate of loss; however, I am not minded to accept this justification. The Operator must show that the charge sought is a genuine estimate of the potential loss caused by the parking breach, in this case, the Appellant’s failure to leave the car park after the maximum free stay period. The Operator has produced a list of costs; however, these appear to be general operational costs, and not losses caused by the Appellant’s breach."

My advice, treat these bandits with the contempt they deserve, refuse to pay, they are chancers who treat you with contempt and try to scare you into paying them excessive 'charges'. Stick to your guns, follow the tips on this site and use the template letters, nothing ventured, nothing gained. I hope this helps other 'victims':T