Humberside Airport Charge

JesterA1

Hi Guys, I have received like many others a silly parking charge from VCS at Humberside Airport for picking someone up in the famous bus stop. I pulled into the bus stop as my friend was stood there, opened my car boot for my friend to put his bag into, then we left. I was there for no longer then 1 minute and obstructed know one. I would be really grateful if you could help me beat this thing.

I have been reading lots of other posts and I'm in the process of writing up a response letter to VCS and will post it here shortly.

Hope you guys can help

Thanks

JesterA1

Here is the letter i will be sending to VCS if it is good to go.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to you as the registered keeper of the vehicle in relation to a parking charge notice (PCN no. XXXXXXXXXX) received on XX/XX/2013. I am asking you to cancel this charge immediately for the following reasons.

1) No parking was actually made
2) No obstructions occurred
3) The supposed signs/warnings were not adequate
4) No contract was knowingly entered
5) The charge is unjustified

If you do not cancel this charge I would like you to send me a POPLA code as I will be taking this to them. If you contact me for any reason other then to inform me my charge has been cancelled or to issue me with my POPLA code only, I will take it as harassment.

Regards
XXXXXXXXXX

Is this good to go guys and girls??

Many Thanks

bod1467

As an appeal to a PPC then it's fine - possibly TOO strong (if you really want to hook a POPLA code). But most people just want such annoyances to go away so I think you're good to go.

If it gets to POPLA stage then you need to include GPEOL (i.e. expand on your point 5), and also something about legal authority to even issue PCNs.

JesterA1

Thanks bod1467.

Yeah, ideally i'd like for them to cancel it without having to go through all the other rubbish but i know that isn't really going to happen. I think i'm going to send a letter of complaint to the airport as well. Any suggestions of information that would be good to put in it?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Search the parking forum for 'Humberside' as a keyword. There was a thread about it only yesterday plus a POPLA appeal win posted this week!

JesterA1

Yes i read that this morning. It was very encouraging to see that i must say. I will send my letter off to VCS and wait for their reply and will update. Am i best to send this as a recorded delivery or will it be ok to go as normal?

Many thanks

bod1467

Normal 1st class mail, get (free) proof of posting from the Post Office.

JesterA1

Hi guys, i got my rejection letter for my appeal from VCS so have put together an appeal to POPLA. Would be grateful if you could give it a once over and see if its ok to send. Any alteration/corrections would be very much appreciated. Thanks in advance

I am writing to you as the registered keeper and would be grateful if you would please consider my appeal for the following reasons.

1) The amount demanded is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
2) It is not relevant land under POFA 2012
3) There is no landowner contract
4) No contract with the driver
5) The signage is unclear and not adequate
6) Non-compliant ANPR (Hidden camera van at a location which is not a car park)

1) The amount demanded is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
The charge given is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss as no losses have occurred; therefore this is unfair as stated in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. The amount claimed is excessive and is being enforced as a penalty for allegedly stopping. VCS are alleging a ‘failure to comply’ but can’t show this is a genuine pre-estimate of loss so are therefore in breach of the BPA Code of Practice. Due to this the charge is unenforceable.

2) Not Relevant Land under POFA 2012.
The driver has not been identified, yet VCS are claiming POFA 2012 registered keeper liability for the charge. As Humberside Airport is designated as an airport by the secretary of the state, the roads within the airport are subject to airport bylaws so POFA 2012 does not apply, meaning the registered keeper is not liable for this charge. Also POFA does not apply to this charge because POFA relates to parking charges and VCS have said the vehicle had stopped on a roadway in which stopping was allegedly prohibited and not in a car park. Due to this they must chase the driver and not the registered keeper of the vehicle.

3) No landowner contract.
As VCS are not the land owners they can’t form a contract with the driver of the vehicle. I would like VCS to provide me with a full un-redacted copy of their contract with the landowner which allows them to make such contracts. A witness statement as to the existence of a contract is not sufficient. I believe there is no contract with the land owner giving VCS the legal standing to impose these charges and pursue them in courts in their name as creditor. An example of this can be seen by District Judge McIlwaine in VCS v Ibbotson, Case No 1SE09849 16.5.2012 (transcript in the public domain). As a result of this VCS have breached the BPA code of Practice Section 7 and failed to demonstrate their legal standing, making this charge unenforceable.

4) No Contract with the driver.
If a contract is to be formed, by entering the site a driver must be able to read, understand and agree to the terms and conditions. A driver could not stop in order to read the signs as they enter the road as they would block the junction and cause obstructions. Also as VCS are only an agent working for the owner, signs do not help them to form a contract. VCS -v-HMRC 2012 is the binding decision in the Upper Chamber which covers this issue with compelling statements of fact about this sort of business model.


5) The signage is unclear and not adequate
The alleged offence is “stopping on a roadway where stopping is prohibited” The signs at this location do not comply with the road traffic regulations or their permitted variations making them unclear and misleading. They also do not face the oncoming traffic and are sporadically placed causing them to be unseen and unreadable to a driver especially without stopping. Therefore they do not comply with the BPA code of practice. VCS are required to show evidence to the contrary.
If I could also point out to you the “No Stopping Zones” section of the chief adjudicator’s first annual POPLA report 2013:

''It is therefore very important that any prohibition is clearly marked; bearing in mind that such signage has to be positioned, and be of such a size, as to be read by a motorist without having to stop to look at it. Signs on red routes, unlike those indicating most parking restrictions, are generally positioned to face oncoming traffic, rather than parallel to it.''

6) Non-compliant ANRP (hidden camera van at a location which is not a car park)
The BPA code of practice contains the following:
''21 Automatic number plate recognition (ANPR)
21.1 You may use ANPR camera technology to manage, control and enforce parking in private car parks, as long as you do this in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner. Your signs at the car park must tell drivers that you are using this technology and what you will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for.
21.2 Quality checks: before you issue a parking charge notice you must carry out a manual quality check of the ANPR images to reduce errors and make sure that it is appropriate to take action. Full details of the items you should check are listed in the Operators’ Handbook.
21.3 You must keep any ANPR equipment you use in your car parks in good working order. You need to make sure the data you are collecting is accurate, securely held and cannot be tampered with. The processes that you use to manage your ANPR system may be audited by our compliance team or our agents.
21.4 It is also a condition of the Code that, if you receive and process vehicle or registered keeper data, you must:
• be registered with the Information Commissioner
• keep to the Data Protection Act
• follow the DVLA requirements concerning the data
• follow the guidelines from the Information Commissioner’s Office on the use of CCTV and ANPR cameras, and on keeping and sharing personal data such as vehicle registration marks.''

At this location, the secret camera van does not operate in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner and I contend that VCS have failed to meet the requirements on all the points in the BPA Code of Practice stated above. VCS will need to show evidence to the contrary on every point, and explain how this hidden camera van can be compliant when this is not a car park, it is a road, and there is no opportunity for drivers in moving traffic to be informed that this technology is in use and what VCS will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for. VCS have breached the BPA Code of Practice as regards the use of a non-compliant ANPR system being merely a van fitted with a hidden camera, patrolling land which is not a 'car park' and neither 'managing, enforcing nor controlling parking'.

I request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

Coupon-mad

Go for it! You will win now.

JesterA1

Thanks ill get this sent off. Will let you know when i get a response.

mokum

I love to know what the outcome is. I have a simular PCN at Humerside Airport.