UPDATED: Forgot to display blue badge - £100 "fine" from New Generation parking

Lovelyjoolz

OK, so I've managed to speak to the deputy manager of one of the store I shopped at. She was lovely. Very apologetic and sympathetic, even though she gets several of these every week!

She couldn't give me the Landowners details, but will be passing my details on and they will hopefully contact me.

But, in case they don't, I'm drafting a letter to send the the PPC. I have blatantly stolen content from Coupon_Mad's many fantastic letters. If there's something I've missed, or done wrong let me know - any comments welcome!

[FONT=&quot]Dear New Generation Parking

Ref Number

I am writing to you as the registered keeper of the vehicle to appeal the above on the following points:[/FONT]

• [FONT=&quot]There are no signs requesting the display of a blue badge immediately adjacent to the disabled bays. During a repeat visit to the car park following receipt of your letter I note that your only signage is high up on the walls of the buildings some yards away from the disabled parking bays. I believe you deliberately place those signs too high and out of sight of a driver, knowing that people are relying upon free parking at the invitation of the retailer so will not see your discriminatory terms. I intend on complaining to the Retail Manager about your modus operandi and intimidation of paying customers. [/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]The passenger was a disabled blue badge holder and therefore has the legal right to use the disabled spaces provided. Despite your signs demanding that vehicles display a blue badge when using the disabled parking bays, the Equality Act 2010 does not require the driver to display any sort of badge or permit. By demanding that the blue badge is displayed, you are adding arbitrary rules to the lawful right of someone to use a ‘reasonable adjustment’ and this could be considered a breach of the Equality Act.[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]The charge is inappropriate, unlawful in the case of the Equality Act and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss incurred for Parking Eye or the landowner. This is a breach of the BPA Ltd code of practice.[/FONT]
• [FONT=&quot]The driver and passenger were genuine customers of the shops and have receipts that prove this.[/FONT]

· [FONT=&quot]I do not believe you have the correct written authorisation from the landowner to issue parking charges and pursue to court. This is a breach of the BPA Ltd code of practice.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]On these grounds I demand that you cancel this charge immediately. If you do not cancel this then I will charge for my time from now on, at a court rate of £18 per hour, plus costs such as stationery, photocopying, printing and postage.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I also reserve the right to issue court proceedings against you and your client, as you are jointly and severally liable for damages for harassment and breach of the Equality Act 2010.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You have clearly been advised about the passenger's disability so I strongly suggest you cancel immediately. You are pursuing charges when you know a blue badge holder is involved. This is a breach of the BPA Ltd code of practice.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Take note: if you reject and send me a POPLA code or send a holding letter asking for receipts, then my charges will apply because anything other than cancellation is wholly unacceptable under these circumstances.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Redx

its almost there , but in my opinion only, I would also add that under the BPA CoP its a requirement to desist from chasing a parking charge when they are told that disabled person qualifying under the EQUALITY ACT 2010 is involved

so add a paragraph stating the above and saying that you also expect it to be cancelled because of that and that you wish to query the details of the landowner as you will be copying them into any future correspondence on this matter if it is not cancelled

ie: as prankster says

You are pursuing charges when you know a blue badge holder is involved. This is a breach of the BPA Ltd code of practice.

Lovelyjoolz

Redx wrote: »

read this by parking prankster, different PPC but similar

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2013_11_01_archive.html

Fantastic! VCS shot themselves in the foot somewhat there!

Lovelyjoolz

Redx wrote: »

its almost there , but in my opinion only, I would also add that under the BPA CoP its a requirement to desist from chasing a parking charge when they are told that disabled person qualifying under the EQUALITY ACT 2010 is involved

so add a paragraph stating the above and saying that you also expect it to be cancelled because of that and that you wish to query the details of the landowner as you will be copying them into any future correspondence on this matter if it is not cancelled

ie: as prankster says

You are pursuing charges when you know a blue badge holder is involved. This is a breach of the BPA Ltd code of practice.

Thank you Redx - I've amended the post to add in those points.

Lovelyjoolz

Forgot to ask - should the PPC have left a ticket on the car at all, or do they not have to do that?

Redx

Lovelyjoolz wrote: »

Forgot to ask - should the PPC have left a ticket on the car at all, or do they not have to do that?

some do , some dont , when they dont they have to follow the rules regarding the NTK more closely

it is certainly not mandatory, so many rely on anpr and possibly ticket machines with vehicle reg entry like PEEL CENTRE stockport

ps:- your "soft appeal" looks fine to me

Lovelyjoolz

The photos printed on the actual PCN that came through the post are pretty rubbish, but you can view them on NGP's website, so I've just had a look.

There are 5 photos, three of them from the rear of the vehicle showing the registration plate. The other two are of the windscreen and dashboard where you can see that there is no badge displayed, but the photo doesn't show the nose of the car and so you can't see the registration.

I'm being pernickity here, because I know I forgot to display the BB, but really, who's to say that the photos taken from the rear are of a totally different car????

Redx

I understand you may wish to nitpick and try to get this cancelled on "evidence" issues but unless you are willing to go to court and debate this with a judge I feel you are missing the main thrust of the argument here

this explains the scenario https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4835943

in this case their "rules" say that a BB must be on show

but the EQUALITY ACT 2010 claims that they must give disabled people more rights and this may mean that the disabled person "forgot" to display the badge as it may be a part of their disability

the point here is that you are disputing everything about their claim , contracts , signage , not a gpeol etc , and winning one point will win at popla

but POPLA do not allow for mitigation, it says so on their website, they also do not have to consider the same rules of "evidence" as a court (it tells you that too)

if this goes to popla, its likely that you will win on not a gpeol, or no contract , or signage , not some iffy photos , to put it bluntly, I do not believe that POPLA have ever allowed an appeal based on what you allege , possibly never will

by all means if you think its relevant, enclose it in your appeal, but do not deflect them from the main "silver bullets" as the objective here is to get the claim cancelled, not win on "iffy points of law"

but if you wished to pursue this all the way to court based on interpretations of photographs, feel free to do so, (but I wouldnt)

hope that explains my opinion on this (as a lay person with no training I add, in case anybody wishes to "troll" my answer)

good luck

Lovelyjoolz

Redx wrote: »

but if you wished to pursue this all the way to court based on interpretations of photographs, feel free to do so, (but I wouldnt)

You are right Redx - I don't wish to go to court over this. I want to get it cancelled as soon as possible. I think I'm nit picking because I'm feeling so frustrated at the moment over this! Firstly because I'm cross that we forgot to display the BB and secondly because I need to return to the car park in question to have another look at their signage so that I am 100% certain of the wording and placement before I send my soft appeal. I'm 99% certain, but the more I think about it, the more nervous and uncertain I get - I want to check before I go sending an appeal letter with inaccurate information on it.

I won't be able to get there before Tuesday and I'm getting antsy over it! Sorry!

Half_way

A few points to remember from above:

Redx

there is no legal requirement to display a blue badge on private land, so the fact one wasnt showing does not change the fact that a disabled person has the rights under the EQUALITY ACT 2010

Just discovered that the landowner is a pension company. It is NOT going to be easy to get them to help!

You've found the land owner, and it doesn't matter if its a pension company, supermarket, or Steve who owns the franchise to a fast food chain, you should let them know and politely remind them that they are responsible for the actions of their agents, and that they should cancel this charge immediately.

I think I'm nit picking because I'm feeling so frustrated at the moment over this! Firstly because I'm cross that we forgot to display the BB and secondly because I need to return to the car park in question to have another look at their signage so that I am 100% certain of the wording and placement before I send my soft appeal.

there should be no need to make any site visits at this stage, if you realy want this thing canceled forget about a "soft appeal" just challenge the whole thing outright.
if possible get a copy of the blue badge and send it to both the parking company and the car park owner ( the pension company)

Tell them that as you have provided evidence that they must now cancel the charge, and if they ( or in the case of the pension company who owns the car park) or their agents do not cancel then you will take this to be a breach of the equalities act, and you may be minded to take things further.

you could also take this from the parking prankster blog

If you do reject the challenge and insist upon taking the matter further I must inform you that I may claim my expenses from you. The expenses I may claim are not exhaustive but may include the cost of stamps, envelopes, travel expenses, legal fees, etc. By continuing to pursue me you agree to pay these costs when I prevail.

And wrap it round the equalities act as well.

once youve informed them about the disability then the balls in their court so to speak, and it is they who should be taking action to make sure that you don't escalate things.