Reassurance re: Wing Parking on behalf of London Borough of Haringey...

Ellie007

Hi Coupon-Mad, and once again many thanks for your invaluable guidance! Date of windscreen ticket is 10th June. Interested to find out more about the new CoP...

Coupon-mad

Ellie007 wrote: »

Hi Coupon-Mad, and once again many thanks for your invaluable guidance! Date of windscreen ticket is 10th June. Interested to find out more about the new CoP...

Here it is but your ticket isn't covered by this one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4663061

'Your' CoP is the March 2013 one (almost exactly the same). Still wondering about that wording about 'tickets issued for breach/loss in a car park owned by a Council but without a Traffic Order could not use POPLA' which is on both versions. Trying to work out what that bit means.

HO87

Wing Parking are members of AOS and have no business requiring the name and address of the driver as a condition of accepting any appeal. They may ask you to disclose the details but you are not obliged to do so.

I am particularly interested in this case as I have an FOI response that positively identifies POPLA as the third stage of the layers of appeal (1 is to WP themselves; 2 to Haringey and 3 to POPLA) and that the basis of the notices is explicitly "breach of contract".

The response also makes it clear that the scheme is operated by the Council itself under the powers vested in it by virtue of s.21(1) Housing Act, 1985 which deals with the management, regulation and control of housing not car parks it seems.

In addition, in response to the question about whether WP retain a proportion of the sum they collected the response from Haringey was:

Our contractor collects the settlement of all notices issued on behalf of the Council and retains a percentage as consideration for their services.

The details of that percentage were not disclosed under the provisions of s.43(2) FOIA.

@Coupon_Mad - You are absolutely correct. Para 20.21 of the latest version of the BPA AOS CoP states:

You may not use this section of the Code, PoFA 2012 or POPLA to manage your unregulated car parks if you are enforcing using the principles of the law of contract

The CoP makes it clear that local authorities should look to manage their car parks under the provisions of the Traffic Management Act, 2004. Not that seems to be being applied.

Oh dear, WP seem to have got themselves into a knot. Or is it Haringey? Either way, they cannot use POPLA or POFA (by seeking to enforce against the registered keeper) and appear to be in direct breach of the CoP. That sounds to me like someone is acting ultra vires - which is in itself a breach of the CoP.

The FOI response is available for use if required.

Guys_Dad

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Here it is but your ticket isn't covered by this one:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4663061

'Your' CoP is the March 2013 one (almost exactly the same). Still wondering about that wording about 'tickets issued for breach/loss in a car park owned by a Council but without a Traffic Order could not use POPLA' which is on both versions. Trying to work out what that bit means.

Why not clarify it with POPLA itself? I am assuming that one would not be able to use the council parking appeals adjudicator either leaving a catch-22 situation.

HO87

I wouldn't describe the situation as a Catch-22 one. It is simply the situation pre-POFA i.e. there is no formalised "appeals" process beyond that offered by the PPC (and, in this case, the landowner - Haringey Council) and the PPC/Council may only pursue the driver. Having seen some of the signage (but not that that applies in the car park in question) WP use to discourage non-permit holders from parking the signs extend no contractual offer. From that perspective they would be whistling to enforce a breach of contract if similar signage was used. The OP would be sensible to return to the car park and take photographs of the signage just in case someone decides to have a "pop".

Coupon-mad

Sooo...either better to ignore it completely (like the good old days) or to try a vague challenge to get a rejection and see how non-compliant with the BPA CoP it is (as Wing do still have to comply with that).

Could even word the challenge summat like:

'You have no cause to write to the registered keeper, please explain the legislation you are relying upon to write to a registered keeper and demand the driver's details. Please also outline in detail, your appeals procedure stages and whether the keeper will be offered a POPLA code if you reject'.

Ellie007

Thanks all, you are the best :beer:

I'll take a piccie of the sign on Monday and post the wording (minus any identifying factors) for your perusal. The 14 days 'grace' expire on Monday but I will not be coughing up for anyone.

Have a great Saturday evening x