Who is right?

iliko

I received an parking violation "invoice" yesterday. See the pictures at http://imgur.com/a/jRzuM#0 and tell me if you the parking attendant was right or wrong issuing the penalty?

According to "ticket":

Operative PM0XXX has reasonable cause to believe that the vehicle was parked in breach of the terms and conditions signposted on the site:

Breach:Parked within a restricted area.

Iceweasel

I suggest that you obscure the number plate at least - right away.

My immediate response / answer to your question is that the vehicle is properly parked.

But who has issued the notice?

iliko

It was issued by Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd.

anamenottaken

You haven't pictured the notice.
Mirror a couple of centimetres over the yellow cross-hatching?
Not in a marked bay?

iliko

anamenottaken wrote: »

You haven't pictured the notice.
Mirror a couple of centimetres over the yellow cross-hatching?
Not in a marked bay?

There is not much on the notice. ,

Mirror, really? Can I say it was folded initially then somebody unfolded it. There are no marked bays in the area at all.

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Ooh jeez you are taking this shower far to seriously

Its a private invoice, its not a penalty

Send a simple appeal to pcm saying


I do not believe you have the legal right to issue parking invoices, if you disagree please send me a code for popla by return.

Then come back here and we will help you with the popla appeql, cost them a bit to

Coupon-mad

kirkbyinfurnesslad wrote: »

Ooh jeez you are taking this shower far to seriously

Its a private invoice, its not a penalty

Send a simple appeal to pcm saying


I do not believe you have the legal right to issue parking invoices, if you disagree please send me a code for popla by return.

Then come back here and we will help you with the popla appeql, cost them a bit to

The OP should wait for the Notice to Keeper to arrive first unless it's a company car. And the OP should read up on the scam of fake PCNs! Any thread will do!

Guys_Dad

Although this shows that you are not parked on the hatchings, I can also see that you don't seem to be parked in a bay and it is impossible to see if where you are parked is a parking area (the other cars are in red bays).

Not saying you are wrong , but just saying what I can see.

iliko

Just a update on the case. After loosing the appeal with PCM I appealed to POPLA and won.

The Operator issued parking charge notice number PM02210XXX arising
out of the presence at Plaza West, Reading, on 27 July 2013, of a
vehicle with registration mark PE0XXXX.
The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has
determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.
5762183538 2 04 November 2013
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
On 27 July 2013, an employee of the Operator observed a grey BMW with the
vehicle registration mark PE0XXXX parked on the private land at Plaza West,
Reading. The employee issued the parking charge notice on the basis that
the vehicle was ‘parked within a restricted area’ in breach of the displayed
terms and conditions. Therefore, the parking charge notice was correctly
issued.
The Appellant made representations to the Operator that he was the driver of
the vehicle at the material time. The Appellant disputes the issue of the
parking charge notice on the basis that there was inadequate and
insufficient signage on the land indicating the area where he parked was a
‘restricted area’.
Once an Appellant submits that the terms of parking were not displayed
clearly enough, the onus is then on the Operator to demonstrate that the
signs at the time and location in question were sufficiently clear.
The Operator has provided an image of the signage on the land, and the
terms state: ‘no parking in this area at any time; no parking outside of
designated parking areas; and no parking on yellow line/ paved / hatched or
landscaped areas’.
Both parties have provided photographs of the vehicle and the land in
question. From the Operator’s photographs, I note that a sign is displayed in
the vicinity of the Appellant’s vehicle. However, I note there is an entrance/
exit point, and a cross hatched area in front of the same. given the distance
of the Appellants vehicle from the signage, i am not satisfied that this sign
referred to the area where the Appellant parked. The Appellant has
provided photographs to show the land in front of his vehicle and I note there
are no signs which seem to apply to where the Appellant parked.
Taking together all of the evidence before me, I must find that the Operator
has failed to produce sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it had taken
reasonable steps to bring the terms of parking to the attention of the
Appellant. Thus, on the balance of probabilities, I am minded to accept the
Appellant’s submission that there was insufficient signage displayed on the
land.
Accordingly, I refuse this appeal. I need not decide on any further issues.

Assessor

Guys_Dad

Excellent! A case won on signage for the list.

Well done.

Stroma

Well done to you