ParkingEye appeals

Redx

the EA2010 has been discussed at great length on here, especially by coupon-mad who is an expert on it, so I suggest you use the forum search tool and find posts she has written about it and read them (basically almost every subject has been written about on here so go find it - to be blunt)

like this thread https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4743355 post #7 and its associated links

and this one https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4889645

and https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4802567

more in this one too https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4882279

as for popla, I dont think you have fully read and understood that newbies thread properly, neither have you read the walk through by umkomaas, otherwise you would be aware that your appeal has to go to the PPC first, it can only go to popla (or the ipc for some companies) if and when the PPC has refused your appeal

in other words you cannot go direct to popla and popla does not figure in your plans at this stage, it cannot as you have not dealt with PE

please read the subject thoroughly like you were asked to do previously, then concentrate on acts of parliament

should you wish to reply to the hospital (which you could do numerous times) you should learn and quote the EA 2010 act, including maybe threatening them with court action , pending the outcome of any appeals or court actions by PE (similar to the lainieee case and trubster case)

Superdude

I have spent about a day and a half researching on this site and others (although this is easily the best) and have read the newbies and walk through thread several times. I do understand that I have to appeal to ParkingEye first, get that rejected and then appeal to POPLA using the appeal reference that comes with the rejection from ParkingEye.
My fault. I probably should have put in my last reply "appeals to ParkingEye and then POPLA".
What I really wanted to know was whether people thought I should re-appeal to the hospital or go straight to the PCN appeals process.

Stroma

Forget the hospital for now, just get your appeal into parking eye, do it online and with snail mail with proof of postage from the post office

Dear Parking Eye

As the registered keeper of (reg) I'm in receipt of your parking invoice xxxxxx dated xxxxxx. I wish to invoke your appeals process as is my right under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, all liability to you company is denied on the following:

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

These points and others will be raised with Popla should you not accept this appeal, and you will be expected to provide a full breakdown of your alleged loss, and your full unredacted contract with the landowner.

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.

Please issue your cancellation within 35 days of this letter or a popla verification code. I have nothing further to add.

Faithfully

Redx

you should be doing BOTH in my opinion, fight them on all fronts , but the PE appeal is the first one to tackle , ASAP

I have just done some of the research work for you and added some links in my last reply that you can look at for similar cases of people with a disability

this BB lark is not actually too relevant as its private land and the BB does not apply, its the EA 2010 that applies , the hospital has to make reasonable adjustments for a protected person (this may be a BB holder or they may not have one but that doesnt mean they are unprotected - this is a fallacy and a trap that these authorities always fall into - they focus on the BB and not the person and their protected status)

its nothing to do with "being conveyed" , its about you and them giving leeway to the protected person and you used it on the basis you were picking up a protected person under the ACT , the fact that protected person wasnt discharged wasnt apparent at the time but you were not to know this - so you acted in the protected persons best interest based on the knowledge at that time)

the hospital , and PE , have to make reasonable adjustments for that protected person, not focus on rules on owning and using a BB , despite what they think is true, it isnt, its also not lawful as you could easily demonstrate in court

once PE are made aware the BB was being used in this manner, the BPA CoP requires that they drop the charge, so it should not go to popla (typically they may argue differently and do not use this BB issue at popla as they fail to understand the arguments as well)

if you have the time, read those links I gave you, and read what CM said, bearing in mind we should not be expected to repeat all of this when its already on here and a few search words will bring up relevant threads , which is what I did)

I appreciate its stressful at this time, too much info, but you are having to learn to run before crawling takes place

I am a BB holder and have a DLA exemption reference as well , so I know how these people discriminate against protected people like me and your relative, they focus on what they see (the BB and the rules) and not the person , or the law

so if it did go to popla, use the other appeal points of not a gpeol , no contract etc , not mitigation as regards a BB

hope that helps ?

now please read those linked threads and any others you find in your search

use the stroma template but add extra info as a point 4) in regards to the BB use by the driver (no names here, no implying who was driving) and scan the BB and add it to the appeal, reminding them of the BPA CoP too

remember, you are acting as the fit and well CARER when helping the protected person with their BB but you are dealing with PE as the keeper , the person they sent the PCN to

but when you write back to the hospital, you need to forcefully remind them that BB use is only local rules and does not trump the law , the EA 2010 and that the person owning that BB is a protected person under the EA 2010 and they are failing in the law by not providing reasonable adjustments, remind them that the BB has no lawful standing on private land and so the EA 2010 is the set of rules they should be applying, not anything to do with a BB and they should be applying the EA 2010 lawful rules even if this protected person had no BB at all or even if it wasnt displayed , the EA 2010 being the overriding factor here and the BB being a "red herring"

bear in mind I am not criticising you, merely trying to educate you and others as to the deal here, because people like myself see this discrimination daily or weekly, usually by people who have no idea about the EA 2010 or the previous DDA 2005 , because the fit and well generally "dont give a monkeys"

its annoying and demeaning that protected people like myself keep having to explain and justify ourselves to the fit and well majority , its also not legal under the EA 2010 as we should not have to justify ourselves to the ignorant people out there who dont do the research or dont care about us , same as those people who use all manner of excuses to park in a disabled bay (cos its raining, cos I will only be 5 minutes , they havent a clue that those spaces are clearly for protected people under the EA 2010 and that they have no legal right to park there , even if there are 10 empty spaces and an empty car park as well)

the above is not a complaint about yourself, other than that at this moment in time you are one of the people who are unknowing about all of what I said, through no fault of your own , but are now dealing and caring for somebody who should get the protections they are entitled to , even if they dont know about them either

The_Deep

My advice would be to make yourself as much of a nuisance as you can to the hospital. The NHS and PPCs have no place sharing a bed together, as soon as the NHS realises this the better.

Superdude

Again, thank you for all your help and advice. It is much appreciated.
I have decided I'm going to appeal to the hospital again first as if it works, the matters then done and dusted and I still have two weeks to appeal to PE. They replied very quickly last time.
I have drafted a response and would like to post it here first for your expert perusal before I send it. Any comments, ideas, suggestions etc would be welcome

I wish to appeal against your decision on the following grounds.
Although my Father was not being conveyed in the vehicle to the hospital, I had parked as close to the enterance of the hospital as I could, in a blue badge bay and displayed his badge as this was the vehicle he was to be conveyed home in and due to his disabilities, had difficulty walking.
There was no way of knowing at the time he was to be admitted to your hospital (we were told some 5 hours later) and he would not be allowed to travel home with me that night.

The Blue Badge scheme: rights and responsibilities in England states the badge can be used "if someone is collecting you or dropping you off and needs to park at the place where you are being collected or dropped." Again I stress I followed him to the hospital to collect him and bring him home and was not to know he would be admitted.

I would also like to draw your attention to The Equalities Act 2010, terms of which I believe you have breeched, namely:
142 Unenforceable terms
(1) A term of a contract is unenforceable against a person in so far as it constitutes, promotes or provides for treatment of that or another person that is of a description prohibited by this Act.

144(1) A term of a contract is unenforceable by a person in whose favour it would operate in so far as it purports to exclude or limit a provision of or made under this Act.

29 Provision of services
(1) A person (a “service-provider”) concerned with the provision of a service to the public or a section of the public (for payment or not) must not discriminate against a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.

(2) A service-provider (A) must not, in providing the service, discriminate against a person (B)—
(a)as to the terms on which A provides the service to B;
(b)by terminating the provision of the service to B;
©by subjecting B to any other detriment.

(3) A service-provider must not, in relation to the provision of the service, harass—
(a)a person requiring the service, or
(b)a person to whom the service-provider provides the service.

(4) A service-provider must not victimise a person requiring the service by not providing the person with the service.

(5) A service-provider (A) must not, in providing the service, victimise a person (B)—
(a)as to the terms on which A provides the service to B

I therefore ask again that you reconsider your decision in what you must surely appreciate to be an extreemly difficult time for myself and family, as he is still in your hospital and will be for some time to come and the added stress of this is just making matters worse in an event that I hope you can see was in no way an attempt to get away with anything.

Again I thank you in advance.

What do we think?

HO87

That's fine but keep on at PE as well. The situation with the hospital could well drag on for some time to come. Don't miss your opportunity to win against PE at POPLA - get on a write your appeal to them today.

Redx

I think you need to add that you are acting as carer for the disabled person (the blue badge holder) and that in that capacity you have acted in the way you did and they seem to have been biased in ruling on the blue badge aspect which is not relevant here.

You should also be adding that the EA 2010 is what counts here not this blue badge, not any rules dreamed up by themselves or their parking company and that both the parking company and themselves could be facing a counter claim under the EA2010 if this charge is not cancelled

and as mentioned above, you should send in the PE appeal asap regardless of this hospital letter exchange

The_Deep

Would a few robust emails to the Chief Executive help?

Superdude

Thanks for the quick responses.
I have added that I was a carer for a disabled person and the threat of a counter claim under the EA 2010 Act to my e-mail as per Redx's suggestion.
Also I will follow your advice and appeal to PE today.
Do you think I should just send the template as layed out by Stroma in post #14 or do I need to add anything to it apart from date and Ref No?
I also have just noticed the bottom of the e-mail they sent me.

The Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust
Positively Welcoming : Actively Respectful : Clearly Communicating : Visibly Reassuring

:rotfl: