Exit blocked by CMS parking attendant to give me "ticket"

surfboy1

techspec wrote: »

Am i then only person who parks legally - and doesn't think parking on someone elses land is acceptable?

It wasn't life or death - you were filling your face.

What has parking legaly got to do with this?
No laws were broken here.;)

Stroma

techspec wrote: »

Am i then only person who parks legally - and doesn't think parking on someone elses land is acceptable?

It wasn't life or death - you were filling your face.

Parking on private land is unregulated, so there is no such thing as parking legally, your comment is not helpful and should be ignored. Can't believe a long time MSE'er would come here and basically endorse the money grabbing scammers.

hoohoo

techspec wrote: »

Am i then only person who parks legally - and doesn't think parking on someone elses land is acceptable?

It wasn't life or death - you were filling your face.

Don't worry techspec you are not the only one. I park 'legally' too...doesn't mean I don't currently have 4 POPLA cases on the go though

surfboy1

techspec wrote: »

Am i then only person who parks legally - and doesn't think parking on someone elses land is acceptable?

It wasn't life or death - you were filling your face.

And don't forget, in most cases, the LANDOWNER openly invites you to park on his land, its the PPC who make silly rules in order to trap motorists and fleece money from the motorists, driving away the LANDOWNERS customers.

techspec

surfboy1 wrote: »

What has parking legaly got to do with this?
No laws were broken here.;)

I will remind you of that when i park on your front lawn

surfboy1

techspec wrote: »

I will remind you of that when i park on your front lawn

But i have not invited you to park on my lawn, it is not a car park.
I will invite you to park on my drive, free for 10 mins then £100 thereafter, if your car has 4 roadwheels then you agree to pay me £100 reduced to £99 if paid on the day. If you walk off my drive you agree to pay me £100. If you do not pay then I will send you lots of letters telling you what I MAY do to recover the money you owe me.
Of course you have NOT broken any law and I would have a hard time getting money from you.

I take it from your post that you do not understand this Private Car Park scam at all?
Maybe you should read around the forums and the whole of the internet then you might understand better.;)

msarim

I had been busy with work but have finally managed to cobble together an appeal. Thanks to all the people who contributed and pointed me in the right direction. Look forward to hear your views on how to tighten it up further before I send it off.

On 18/4/2013 I was the driver of vehicle registration number xxxxxxx. As the driver of this vehicle I dispute and deny the charge for the reasons set out below:


- No contract/inadequate grace period

There is/was categorically no contract between the driver and Car Park Management Services UK (CMS UK). I did not see any signs when I first entered the car park and therefore had no idea about any alleged contract or restrictions and would certainly not have agreed to pay this extortionate 'charge' under any circumstances. For that very reason, when I got out of the car and read the nearest sign, I decided to leave and informed the person who I presume to be a CMS UK agent, as he was not wearing an obviously identifiable company uniform/ID, that I was just going to park elsewhere. The car was moved within a few seconds. The British Parking Association (BPA) code of practice states in clause 13:

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.


I am convinced that I left the car park within the allotted grace period. According to the parking charge notice provided by CMS UK, I was in the car park for 18 seconds.

I request that POPLA seek from CMS their definition of “grace period” as this was not sign posted on anywhere within the car park as can be seen on the attached photograph of one of the signs.

In addition, if CMS are alleging that this ticket is a contractual sum then why are they not adhering to any of the regulations surrounding VAT? They did not provide me with a VAT invoice which states what service I have apparently would have received in exchange for the 'charge' if I had chosen to stay in the car park and potentially had become liable (which I have shown that I did not, and so was never liable). The BPA have stated categorically that private parking charges do not attract VAT (based on the VCS -v- HMRC 2013 appeal decision) and therefore it follows that private parking charges cannot be a contractual matter, and can only represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss. A private parking company cannot allege a contract exists on the one hand (for POPLA and for the public) and yet suggest it's non-contractual and therefore a non-VAT matter (for HMRC).


CMS agent blocked the exit

Once I had informed the CMS UK attendant that I will be moving my car, he threatened me not to leave and moved his car to the exit. As I tried to squeeze past his car, he repeatedly moved it back and forth to stop me from doing so. This is an offence against the POFA 2012 act, 54, 1(b). Section 54 Offence of immobilising etc. vehicles, states:

(1)A person commits an offence who, without lawful authority
(a)immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or
(b)moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means, intending to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle by a person otherwise entitled to remove it.

I require that as the parking attendant acted illegally, the appeal be upheld.

I require POPLA to review any CCTV footage from this date and also ask the attendant in question to provide a statement concerning this incident. I require the operator to provide relevant copies of their attendant training manuals, to prove that their attendants are correctly educated in the requirements of POFA 2012.

I require the operator to provide training records for the attendant in question, to show that the attendant understands the requirements of POFA 2012 in the course of his duties.

Eventually I was able to leave the car park by driving through a small gap the attendant had left. The fact that I was able to leave does not mean that the attendant had not committed a crime. The use of the words 'intending' and 'inhibit' in the act clearly show this.

While I was manoeuvring the vehicle through the small gap the parking attendant stuck the ticket under the windscreen wiper while the vehicle was moving. This is not a correct method of giving notice. POFA 2012 states:

4) The notice must be given
(a)before the vehicle is removed from the relevant land after the end of the period of parking to which the notice relates, and
(b)while the vehicle is stationary,

Since this was not complied with, I request that this appeal be allowed.

I submit as evidence photographs x,y,z, supplied to me by the operator. These show the vehicle in the car park, and clearly show the notice is not affixed.

I understand standard procedures for parking attendants are to take photographs of the vehicle with the ticket affixed. As the operator has submitted other photographs without the ticket affixed, but none with the ticket affixed, this can be taken as proof that the ticket was never affixed properly.

If the operator believes this is not part of their standard practice, I request they make available their operating manual for their attendants showing their standard practices.


No site agreement/contract with landowner/occupier

The CMS UK parking notice states that it has been served on behalf of the landowner. However, I doubt that CMS UK have the legal status and overriding right to pursue parking charge notices. I therefore require CMS UK to supply and POPLA to review:

• A copy of the current signed site agreement or contract with the landowner/occupier of that site
• A copy of the wording of the current imposed permit scheme with proof that the landowner has agreed to/been informed about it.
• A current map of all the areas and bays of that car park where the permit scheme is and is not applicable, as agreed with the landowner/occupier.
• Contemporaneous photos of the actual signs on site taken from the view of the driver of a car at the entrance and in the car park.
• A definitive map of where these signs are in that particular car park



The Parking Charge exceeded the appropriate amount.

The demand for a payment of £90 as noted within the Parking Charge is a punitive amount that has no relationship to the loss that would have been suffered by the Landowner. The BPA code of practice states:

19.5 If the parking charge that the driver is being asked to pay
is for a breach of contract or act of trespass, this charge
must be based on the genuine pre-estimate of loss that
you suffer.

19.6 If your parking charge is based upon a contractually
agreed sum, that charge cannot be punitive or
unreasonable

I require CMS UK to provide a detailed breakdown of how the amount of the 'charge' was arrived at.

In addition, CMS UK are also not compliant with the early payment discount clause of the BPA code of practice which states:

19.7 If prompt payment is made, you must offer a reduced
payment to reflect your reduced costs in collecting the
charge. The reduction in cost should be by at least 40% of
the full charge. ‘Prompt payment’ is defined as 14 days from
the date the driver or the keeper received the notice.


The discount that CMS UK offered for payment within 14 days only amounted to 38.9% which is clearly in breach of the aforementioned clause.


No breach and no trespass

If there was no contract, then at most the allegation can only be a civil trespass. This is denied - and indeed the CMS sign & ticket does not mention trespass nor breach, so there is no charge applicable. However, for the avoidance of doubt, if CMS do now try to allege that this is the nature of this 'charge' then the driver would be potentially only be liable for damages owed to the owner/occupier who may have suffered a loss. Since no ‘damage’ occurred in the car park and also given the fact that the car park was not completely full in short time the car was on site, there was in fact no loss at all and this charge is purely a profiteering penalty, out of all proportion to the brief stop.

No reliable evidence from CPS

As the “agent” I saw on site was not wearing any easily identifiable ID/uniform, I contend that any photos or notes provided by CMS have been supplied only by an anonymous (non CMS employee) person on-site, taking the photos with an ordinary camera and then uploading them to the CMS website. I believe that CMS pay significant 'bounties' to landowner/occupiers for tickets, clearly any such 'evidence' fails to provide the level of reliability and accountability expected of any BPA AOS member.

Non-CMS staff ordinary residents or on-site workers looking purely for opportunities to collect 'bounties' on site have a vested interest in taking immediate photos of any car and will also not be conversant at all with the Protection of Freedoms Act nor with the BPA Code of Practice (whether it be regarding grace periods, immobilising vehicles or any/all other requirements). It is my contention that any 'evidence' provided by CMS comprises purely speculative tip-off photos from a member of the public in pursuit of personal gain, and as such is wholly unreliable and so any contractual or breach/trespass allegation is unfair and unenforceable.


I respectfully ask POPLA to direct CMS UK to cancel this ticket.


yours faithfully

This appeal has been based on the links/tips provided by posters above. If you guys feel that certain sections are irrelevant to my case or make the appeal weaker, please let me know

msarim

Also would it be wise to post a thread seeking advice on Pepipoo?

Stroma

msarim wrote: »

Also would it be wise to post a thread seeking advice on Pepipoo?

Yes run this past pepipoo before you submit to popla

nigelbb

It's a good comprehensive defence that covers most of the important points but lose the subjective stuff like "I did not see any signs when I first entered the car park " instead phrase it as "No signs are visible at the entrance". Any signs are almost certainly not compliant with the BPA CoP so throw that in as well. Check Appendix B of the CoP for details of exactly what signs must be displayed http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/BPA_CodeofPractice_2012_v2_March2013.pdf