LegionGroup PCN

ulcer9mm

Hi All,

This is my first post and I have spent several hours reading through previous appeals and process by which to do so. First off, a huge thanks to all who have provided information, it's good to know that there are others like myself who won't take being threatened with legal action lying down!

The reason for starting a new thread is i've not read anywhere about parking charge notices issues in pay and display hospital car parks.

Basically, My partner works as a Doctor and parked in the hospital car park which had recently changed to pay and display (this is in Bristol, England) she had no change on her and obviously had to go into work and do her shift so left the vehicle in an allocated bay without purchasing a parking ticket.

She returned to a ticket from LegionGroup specifying she had failed to display a ticket (normal value approx £3.50 for the duration of her shift) demanding a payment of £60 but they'd accept £30 if it was paid within 14 days.

Having read the forums i'm aware that we should await a NTK letter and not identify she was the driver, but I wondered what grounds we'd have to challenge this since she works at the hospital in question and this is clearly a PCN.

At no point does it mention the word "Penalty" the appeals process is highlighted on the ticket which states we have 28 days in which to notify them and asking for the usual, name of the driver etc etc.

I've successfully challenged tickets from Private Eye at commercial premises before but as I say never heard of parking enforcement at hospital grounds.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated

Redx

there are several threads already on the same subject so not sure you looked hard enough ?

ie:- use the forum search tool in the green banner near the top and use the word LEGION , or HOSPITAL and several are found

anyway, also read this too https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822

I think you meant parking eye, not ian hislops magazine too

there are 3 main areas you concentrate on

1) The amount being claimed is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner
2) Your signage does not comply with the BPA Code of Practice
3) You are not the landowner and do not have the capacity to offer contracts or to bring a claim for trespass

ulcer9mm

Parking Eye is exactly what I meant haha! Many thanks for the advice

Redx

lol

here is a legion one https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4870468 , but there are others plus plenty from other hospitals that are not legion too , especially burton I think it was

Coupon-mad

The reason for starting a new thread is i've not read anywhere about parking charge notices issues in pay and display hospital car parks.

I presume you haven't yet discovered 'search this forum' next to 'forum tools' in the line above the threads on page one of this parking forum?

use the forum search tool in the green banner near the top and use the word LEGION , or HOSPITAL and several are found

anyway, also read this too http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/....php?t=4816822

As above, tons to find about this lot. I don't use the green banner though, I use the one next to 'forum tools' in the header above the stickies because that is then a search ONLY of this sub-forum.

ulcer9mm

Hi Guys, So just a little update. My Partner has eventually received a "notice to owner" - unpaid Parking charge notice dated 31/03/2014.

Reading over the advice it says they have until Day 56 to contact you otherwise they are in breach of POFA 2012. Is this accurate, By my mathematical calculations The ticket was issued on Jan 27th 2014, which means 4 days until the end of Jan then 28 in Feb and 31 in March has them sitting on Day 63 before even sending the Notification to Owner.

My real question is, do I have to contest it on these grounds mentioned previously (no genuine pre-estimate of loss etc) challenge the fact they have exceeded the time limit, or just laugh at it and throw it in the bin?

AoD

It just means they can't use PoFA 2012 to hold the keeper liable. It is not a winning point by itself (although I once got OPC to cancel a charge based purely on a late NtK).

Don't bin it. Appeal as you were going to. You can add a point about the late NtK and that they can now only hold the driver liable, not the keeper.

Guys_Dad

Actually, look at the current last page of POPLA DECISIONS thread that is an exact replica of your situation and the motorist won because the PPC failed to follow POFA.

I would use the some of thewords of the assessor as point 1 of your appeal but do edit out what is NOT applicable

It is the Appellant’s case that:

a) The parking charge does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of the loss caused by the alleged breach.
b) The Operator does not have sufficient authority to issue parking charge notices in relation to this land.
c) The Operator’s Notice to Keeper does not meet the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 for a number of reasons, including that it does not identify the creditor, and that it was issued out of time.

It is not clear in what capacity the Operator submits the Appellant is liable. In its case summary the Operator submits that it holds the Appellant liable under contract law not according to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012; however, it is clear that the Appellant does not admit to being the driver of the vehicle, and the Operator has provided no evidence that he was. The only person directly liable under contract law is the driver. The keeper of the vehicle, where not the driver, is not a party to the agreement and so cannot be held liable under it.

Having said that it is not seeking to hold the Appellant liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, the Operator goes on to state that the Appellant is in fact liable as the registered keeper of the vehicle as he did not inform the Operator of the name and address of the driver.
Liability for parking charges lies primarily with the driver; however, the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 provides that, in certain circumstances, the keeper of a vehicle may be held liable for parking charges incurred by the driver of the vehicle. Keeper liability arises only from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, not the law of contract, and so the Operator must show that the criteria laid down by the Act were met in order to show that a keeper is liable for the parking charge.


In order for the Operator to be able to recover unpaid charges from the registered keeper, four conditions must be met. One of these conditions is that: either a notice to driver in accordance with paragraph 7 of the schedule, followed by a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 8 is given; or, a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 9 is given.
The Operator initially issued a notice to the vehicle at the time. Accordingly the Operator must show that it issued notices which meet the requirements set out in paragraphs 7 and 8.
Paragraph 7(e) states that the Notice to Driver must “identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment may be made’.

In this case, the Operator has not produced an actual copy of the parking charge notice issued to the vehicle, but has produced a copy of its records of the information given on the notice. I can only make my decision on the basis of the evidence produced, and this ‘computer copy’ of the notice does not identify the ‘creditor’ nor does it specify how and to whom payment is to be made.
Furthermore, paragraph 8 (4) states that the notice must be given by handing it to the keeper, leaving it at a current address, or sending it by post to a current address, within ‘the relevant period’.
Paragraph 8 (5) states that the relevant period is ‘28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given’.
Paragraph 8 (6) states that a notice sent by post is presumed to be given on the second working day, after the day on which it is posted.

In this case the only notice which could be a Notice to Keeper, the letter titled ‘Formal Demand’, is dated xx January 2014 and so would be deemed to be ‘given’ on xx January 2014. The day after the day on which the notice to driver was given was xx October 2013. Accordingly the first period of 28 days, until xx November 2013, must be given for the driver to respond. The Operator then had a further 28 days, until xx December 2013, to ‘give’ a notice to keeper.

It seems therefore, that the Operator has failed to provide evidence that either a compliant Notice to Driver under paragraph 7, or a compliant Notice 4 xx April 2014 to Keeper under paragraph 8 was issued. Accordingly, the Operator has failed to demonstrate keeper liability.

The Operator has not produced any evidence to demonstrate that the Appellant was the driver of the car and so has not produced any evidence to show that he is liable for the parking charge as either the driver or registered keeper.

ulcer9mm

Thanks Guys, So pilfering info from various sections and threads i've come up with the following initial appeals letter. Any feedback would be welcome prior to sending it:

To whom it may concern,

Regarding the alleged offence relating to parking charge notice Number N*****

As the registered keeper, I have received your parking invoice which of course, I decline your invitation to pay. I wish to invoke your appeals process, since all liability to your company is denied on the following basis:

It is the Appellant’s case that:

a) The parking charge does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of the loss caused by the alleged breach.
b) The Operator does not have sufficient authority to issue parking charge notices in relation to this land.
c) The Operator’s Notice to Keeper does not meet the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 for a number of reasons, including that it does not identify the creditor, and that it was issued out of time.

In its case summary the Operator submits that it holds the Appellant liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012; however, it is clear that the Appellant does not admit to being the driver of the vehicle, and the Operator has provided no evidence that he/she was. The only person directly liable under contract law is the driver. The keeper of the vehicle, where not the driver, is not a party to the agreement and so cannot be held liable under it.

The operator alleges that a ticket was issued on 27th January 2014 and under POFA 2012 the Keeper is liable. Interestingly POFA 2012 is quoted in the operators correspondence but not fully followed, Paragraph 8(5) identifies that in order for the operator to claim unpaid charges from the keeper of a vehicle The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given.

From the operator’s letter dated 31st March 2014 it is identified the initial PCN was issued on January 27th 2014. The Keeper asserts that this surpasses the 56 days required to inform the keeper (day 63 to be precise)

Please issue your standard cancellation letter or a specific, detailed rejection letter. If you choose to send the latter, it must state:

- the legal basis of your charge (i.e. breach, trespass or contractual fee?) as your signage was not seen/accepted by the driver and your recent Notice failed to make the basis of the charge clear. As keeper, I cannot be expected to guess the nature of the allegation.

- if alleging breach of contract, with your rejection letter I require a breakdown of the liquidated damages suffered, and by whom, and when this calculation was determined and how this particular 'loss' arose. Please also explain how/why you charge a fixed sum no matter whether the alleged contravention was trivial or more serious and how that can amount to a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

- if alleging trespass please enclose evidence of the perpetrator and proof of the liquidated damages alleged and the calculation of this sum.

- if alleging 'contractual fee' I require that you now send me a VAT invoice by return and explain the daily rate for parking and service provided for the fee. Failure to provide this information and a VAT invoice now that I have requested it, will be considered evidence that this was not in fact a genuine offer to park for a fee and is merely a penalty which is not recoverable in contract law (as found by Mr Recorder Gibson QC, on appeal at Luton County Court in the case of Civil Enforcement v McCafferty 3YK50188 (AP476) 21/2/2014).

Take formal note:

(a) Your unsupported, unsolicited invoice and any further letters if you persist, will constitute harassment. If you continue, your contact and that of any agent will be deemed a 'serious and persistent unwarranted threat' as found by Lord Justice Sedley in Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 46 (10 February 2009) and I reserve the right to take the matter further. You have been informed that I consider this to be harassment so any decision to send further letters rather than cancel the invoice will reinforce the evidence of your persistent unwarranted threat and you may be required to justify your actions in court.

(b) Any obfuscation on your part, such as pretending I have to name the driver, alleging I am too late or unable to appeal as keeper or requiring more evidence when clearly I have already set out my full challenge for this stage, will be reported to the DVLA and to your respective ATA, as a sanctionable breach of your Code of Practice.

(c) If you reject my challenge and insist upon taking the matter further I must inform you that I may claim my costs from you and my time at the court rate of £18 per hour. The expenses I may claim are not exhaustive but may include the cost of stamps, envelopes, travel expenses and legal fees as well as liquidated damages for distress arising from harassment.

By continuing to pursue me you hereby accept liability to pay my costs when I prevail and you acknowledge and imply full understanding of the above.

bod1467

Quick reply to say to edit your post to remove any identifiable info, such as the PCN reference.

Plus don't use actual POPLA assessment wording - use appeal wording that will lead the assessor to write those assessment words.

ulcer9mm

Thanks, will re-phrase that section and have edited the PCN number