We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Parking ticket from Wings
Options
Comments
-
I've just received a reply to my email and they've come back with a rejection. I'm just wondering what the advice of the forum is on how I take this further ?Thank you for your recent letter regarding the above and we have noted your comments.
You have raised 4 points of dispute, namely:
1) We do not have sufficient interest in the land to be able to offer contracts.
2) Even if we are able to offer contracts, the amount claimed would be a breach of the
Unfair Contract Terms Act.
3) The amount demanded bears no resemblance to any possible loss by our client
and is clearly an attempt to impose an unlawful penalty.
4) The warning signs are too small and inconspicuous.
We will deal with each of your points below.
1) We dispute that we do not have sufficient interest in the land to issue contracts.
Your claim is made, we suggest, purely on the basis of having read various internet
sites rather than a knowledge of the exact legal standing between ourselves and
our client.
We confirm that the contract to park is not actually offered by ourselves at all, it is
offered by our clients, who do hold the necessary legal interest in the property. We
are not offering the contract, we are merely acting as agents in the management of
that contract. We have a written and signed agreement with Royal Borough of
Greenwich where they authorise us to "issue private Parking Charge Notices on
behalf of the Client and to take all necessary action, including legal action, to
recover any charges due to the Clients from drivers charged for unauthorised
parking."
Both ourselves and our clients are satisfied that the written and signed agreement
between us does provide us with sufficient legal authority to issue the PCN and to
seek to recover payment of that PCN from you on their behalf.
2) The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("the Act") fundamentally changed the law on
1 October 2012 and this now overrides the issue raised regarding the Unfair
Contract Terms Act .
In the Act, there is a definition of both "parking charge" and "adequate notice" of
such private parking charges. The relevant sections of Schedule 4 to the Act state:
“parking charge”
(a) in the case of a relevant obligation arising under the terms of a relevant
contract, means a sum in the nature of a fee or charge, and
(b) in the case of a relevant obligation arising as a result of a trespass or other tort,
means a sum in the nature of damages
“relevant obligation” means
(a) an obligation arising under the terms of a relevant contract; or
(b) an obligation arising, in any circumstances where there is no relevant contract,
as a result of a trespass or other tort committed by parking the vehicle on the
relevant land;
The reference in the definition of “parking charge” to a sum in the nature of
damages is to a sum of which adequate notice was given to drivers of vehicles
(when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land).
For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) “adequate notice” means notice given by:
(b) the display of one or more notices which
(i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and
(ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park
vehicles on the relevant land".
Therefore we believe that there is no breach of the Unfair Contract Terms Act as
you suggest as all parking charges relevant to this case are in accordance with the
above.
3) Regardless of whether a parking charge is based on a breach of contract or a
trespass (or other tort) the parking charges which may be demanded is the amount
stated on the car park signage. This is because "damages" is specifically defined in
the Act as relating to the amount of the parking charge stated on "one or more
notices" (i.e. the car park signage). There is no question that the charge made is a
"penalty", because Parliament has deemed that parking charges, such as ours, are
legally enforceable, so long as the amount demanded is stated on the car park
signage (which it was).
Furthermore, since the Act permits parking charges to be rendered on private land,
and the case of Parking Eye Limited v Somerfield Stores Limited [2012] EWCA Civ
1338 (Court of Appeal) held that the parking company was entitled to claim the sum
of £75 in 2005 for a parking charge, (and the case specifically says that such a
charge was not a "penalty") - which with inflation is close to £95 - and would
therefore not be a "penalty", reference to the Unfair Contract Terms Act is not of
any relevance in the context of this parking charge. You should also be aware that
the amount of our parking charges accords with the recommendations of the British
Parking Association, of which we are a member.
4) The warning signs on display are larger than the recommended minimum size
allowed by the British Parking Association so we refute the suggestion that they are
too small. We also refute the suggestion that they are inconspicuous as they are
placed in prominent positions.
We consider we have given you a very full response to your appeal letter and we also
note that you have raised no other grounds of appeal. In light of our detailed response, the
parking charge remains due and owing.
We will allow a further period of 14 days from the date of this letter during which you may
pay the discounted charge of £60.00 and thereafter the full charge of £100.00 will be due.
If you wish to take advantage of this offer, please contact us prior to making payment so
that we may make the necessary adjustment to your account.
You have also asked for a Validation Code to be supplied so that you may take your
appeal to POPLA. However, before you can take your appeal to POPLA, you are required
to undertake the full appeal process open to you and at this stage you have not done so.
We hope that we have addressed the issues raised in your appeal, but if you are
dissatisfied with the facts of the reply, you have the option of taking your complaint further,
to Stage 2, by writing directly to our clients within 14 days. If you wish to make a Stage 2
appeal, please address your correspondence to:
Sue Treherne, Tenancy Systems & Performance Team Leader
Royal Borough of Greenwich
The Woolwich Centre
35 Wellington Street
Woolwich
London
SE18 6HQ
or it can be emailed to: central-neighbourhood-office@greenwich.gov.uk
The Stage 2 appeal must be made within 14 days of the date of this reply and must state
why you are not satisfied with the reply and must include any relevant new evidence.
Please remember to quote your vehicle registration and the PCN reference number.
Please note that enquiries about appeals will not be dealt with by telephone.0 -
Email back to them that if they don't supply the validation code withoin 35 days of the original appeal that you sent, it automatically is accepted, per the bpa code of practice, any other quasi legal carp is irrelevant.. They must comply or drop the charge. There is no such thing as stage two, they must supply it
Also tell that you require proof that they have authority , not a reply that they do, you require a copy of the contract to view.When posting a parking issue on MSE do not reveal any information that may enable PPCs to identify you. They DO monitor the forum.
We don't need the following to help you.
Name, Address, PCN Number, Exact Date Of Incident, Date On Invoice, Reg Number, Vehicle Picture, The Time You Entered & Left Car Park, Or The Amount of Time You Overstayed.
:beer: Anti Enforcement Hobbyist Member :beer:0 -
So they claim the contract is between the motorist and the landowner. Does it state that anywhere on any of the signs/paperwork? Has the landowner who would therefore be the principal, named at all? Need proof of all they claim (if/when it gets to POPLA).
Their interpretation of PoFA is so way off the mark to be untrue. PoFA does not make any so-called contracts fair all of a sudden. It's utter bo*****s.
And then they use an unrelated case (PE v Somerfield) to try to apply to the contracts between PPC/landowner and the motorist. Different things.
"Parliament has deemed that parking charges, such as ours, are legally enforceable, so long as the amount demanded is stated on the car park signage (which it was)." Be good to challenge them to show where this is the case, because Parliament has done no such thing.
Who can one complain to over such total misrepresentation of the legal position? Surely such claims cross some legal line somewhere. Their lies should all be exposed at POPLA. Shame it'll never reach court. Their reply would potentially result in a "toothbrush" moment.0 -
To be fair to the PPC (never thought I would say that:)) they have actually read & responded to the appeal albeit inaccurately rather than just deliver a generic response like PE's EYE01. They also responded very quickly. If it were me I would play their game & write to Sue Treherne towards the end of the 14 days they allow for Stage 2 & with any luck she won't respond within the 35 day deadline from the original challenge/appeal.
Their appeal process isn't so unreasonable. We came across one the other day that had three levels of appeal & insisted that each stage could take up to 35 days!0 -
Yes that's CEL and complaints have been raised on that. Still on this one, its completely irrelevant their appeal structure, an appeal has been sent they even acknowledge as an appeal in their reply. They must either accept it or send a popla code within 35 days, if they fail on that its automatically accepted.When posting a parking issue on MSE do not reveal any information that may enable PPCs to identify you. They DO monitor the forum.
We don't need the following to help you.
Name, Address, PCN Number, Exact Date Of Incident, Date On Invoice, Reg Number, Vehicle Picture, The Time You Entered & Left Car Park, Or The Amount of Time You Overstayed.
:beer: Anti Enforcement Hobbyist Member :beer:0 -
I replied back with the below...lets see what they come back withThank you for your reply.
First and foremost, there is no legal bearing that I go through your two-stage appeal process. I would request again that you supply the POPLA Validation code and that a failure to supply it within 35 days means that the appeal is automatically accepted as per BPA code of conduct.
I would like to address your points as follows:-
1) Can you please provide proof of this contract as I would like to include this in my appeal to POPLA.
2) This is a civil contract and as such it is not allowed to punish or penalise the consumer. The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations of 1999 do apply here.
3) Please see the request for a copy of the signage.
4) Taking into account your response to point (1) can you please confirm the signage text as that should clearly state that the contract is between the motorist and the landowner. Can you also clarify that the signage includes the charges payable as required by law. (see section 16 point 1 below)
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/9155/guidance-unpaid-parking-charges.pdf
The photographs that are on your website of the signage are not clear. To constitute a contract the signs need to legible. As your photographs prove the signs were not legible at the distance at which the vehicle was parked.
I will remind you that as claimants the burden is upon yourselves to provide the requested information to allow a fair review of this matter.0 -
''2) The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("the Act") fundamentally changed the law on 1 October 2012 and this now overrides the issue raised regarding the Unfair Contract Terms Act .''
No, it doesn't, the POF Act doesn't change other laws it just sets out some guidelines for registered keepers to be pursued (with no more power than PPCs ever had against drivers). 'Unfair Contracts' law still applies of course if you argue it well at POPLA.
''Parliament has deemed that parking charges, such as ours, are legally enforceable, so long as the amount demanded is stated on the car park signage.''
No Parliament has not; and that sentence is misleading at best.
''However, before you can take your appeal to POPLA, you are required to undertake the full appeal process open to you and at this stage you have not done so.''
No you are not. In fact they will miss their deadline soon! That was a rejection letter and didn't include the necessary POPLA code, and they only have 35 days to get that to you under the POF Act.
Do keep us updated - and they were so quick to reply with that drivel (and they mentioned internet forums!) that I am wondering if Wing are reading this?!
If so -
TO WING EMPLOYEE = SORT OUT THE CARP ON YOUR WEBSITE PRETENDING THAT POPLA 'MAY NOT APPLY'. BETTER STILL, GET A PROPER, USEFUL JOB!PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
!!!!!! this exemplifies how confusing it is for any newbie when we start mithering on about going to POPLA when we all know that 'ignore [unless genuine court papers turn up]' is far easier to understand and far easier to implement.0
-
Computersaysno wrote: »!!!!!! this exemplifies how confusing it is for any newbie when we start mithering on about going to POPLA when we all know that 'ignore [unless genuine court papers turn up]' is far easier to understand and far easier to implement.
Please, stop banging on about ignoring when that isn't the best advice now in the opinion of most regulars. Are Parking Eye paying you to try to make people slip back into 'ignore, ignore, ignore' mode?!
Fact is we like to see people win at POPLA at the PPCs' expense and this OP is quite happy appealing/challenging this, by the looks of it!PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Computersaysno wrote: »!!!!!! this exemplifies how confusing it is for any newbie when we start mithering on about going to POPLA when we all know that 'ignore [unless genuine court papers turn up]' is far easier to understand and far easier to implement.
Going to POPLA is easy enough and really really hurts the PPC not just on behalf of the actual person involved but for everyone else as well.
I personally try and add something to all my appeals on the lines of
I won't be corresponding further with you. Cancel the invoice or send me the POPLA code within the required timescale.
because I can't be faffed with multi-stage appeals and am quite happy for the PPC to fail by timing out.
Where I know from their website there is a multi stage appeal I also add in something like.
I wish to automatically escalate until this reaches the end of your appeal process. To avoid doubt, this means that if this challenge fails your appeals process at any stage you are required to automatically escalate it to the next stage without further input from me, until such time as the appeals process is ended and the invoice either cancelled or a POPLA code issues.
Well done to the OP though. Wings are going to waste days of work on this, only to fail at the POPLA stage for failing to produce a contact!Dedicated to driving up standards in parking0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards