Railway Byelaw 14 NTK

ParkingPhil

I have received an NTK from London & Southeastern Railway for parking in a station car park "without displaying a valid ticket or voucher". They are using Railway Byelaw 14 to try to get £90 out of me which will go up to £165 after 14 days (of which about 3 have passed).


This byelaw is not one I have come across before and I am quite surprised to find there is some legal basis to their claim unlike most private parking companies. They can apparently take me to a magistrate's court, claim their charge and costs and the magistrate can fine me up to £1,000.


My initial standpoint is that I am innocent until proven guilty, so I intend to give them no information but ask pertinent questions and make them work to prove that there has both been a contravention and that they have the legal right to claim the money from me. I certainly have no intention of telling them who the driver was.


Their NTK states twice clearly that as owner of the vehicle I am liable for the parking charge even if I was not the driver. The byelaw states "The owner of any motor vehicle, bicycle or other conveyance used, left or placed in breach of Byelaw 14(1) to 14(3) may be liable to pay a penalty as displayed in that area." The parts of the byelaw it mentions basically says people have to pay the car park's charges to park.


I would argue that the word "may" is not clear enough for them to state categorically that I am liable. The same byelaw states "The owner of the motor vehicle, bicycle or other conveyance shall be liable to an Operator or an authorised person for the costs incurred in clamping". Here the word "shall" is definite whereas the word "may" is not. I want them to demonstrate that I am definitely liable even though they do not know (or apparently care) who the driver was.


I also intend to ask them to prove conclusively that the contravention took place. A photo of my car in a parking space (not that they have provided this) does not demonstrate anything. They need a photo of the dashboard to show there is nothing there. I also want them to prove that a PCN was left with my car and available to the driver on his/her return in order to pay the reduced charge they inevitably offer before it went up to the £90 they are now demanding.


I would appreciate any comments on my approach or where I can get more information on defending myself against the byelaw. There isn't a whole lot available on the Internet on Railway Byelaw 14.


Thanks a lot.

HO87

So, in essence you are being warned that they are looking at an offence under Byelaw 14(3) - non-payment. So they could, in theory, pursue you as the keeper (presumably) for the "penalty" displayed in the area.

Arguing the interpretation of the word "may" is going to serve no purpose as it simply provides the operator, in this case L&SER with a degree of discretion in the same way as other enforcement powers, such as those of arrest, are defined. You will not find that any power of arrest, search or seizure that uses the words "a police officer will..." they all use the word "may".

The crucial element of the alleged offence that L&SER will have to adduce evidence of is was there displayed at the time signs showing the level of penalty? If there wasn't then you have a defence (in that the keeper liability provisions will not have been fulfilled) and if the signs showing a lesser penalty then they are also similarly hamstrung. Check the signs first.

The complication is that, technically, as far as byelaw offences are concerned there is no formal means of appeal and L&SER are under no legal obligation to prove anything to you or provide you with any of their evidence, until such time as you enter a "not guilty" plea at court. I assume that is not where you'd like to go.

Recent convictions for Byelaw 14 offences have incurred fines in excess of £300 plus costs.

I suggest that you take yourself off to PePiPoo - click here - on their Private Parking Ticket forum (I know this not technically a private ticket) where there are a number of posters who are far more knowledgeable and should be able to advise you further.

ParkingPhil

Are you serious?! They have no obligation to present the evidence against me until I go to court?! How the hell did that situation occur? Surely I am entitled to prepare a suitable defence for myself before the hearing? Even kiddie murderers are entitled to know the evidence against them first!


As it happens, I went to the car park today to read and photograph their signs. There is nothing on there to say what the amount of the penalty would be, only that the amount would be on a PCN. But how could that give me a defence? There is nothing in Railway Byelaw 14 that I can see which requires them to show the level of a PCN charge.


I also note that the sign talks about Meteor which is presumably the parking management company. They would presumably have to abide by the laws governing a PPC. This NTK is from the train operator who seem to have been handed a law for them to make as much money as they think they can get away with (brown envelope to the government maybe?). It seems there is confusion about who I am dealing with and therefore what laws really apply. Could there be a defence there?

TrickyWicky

ParkingPhil wrote: »

Are you serious?! They have no obligation to present the evidence against me until I go to court?! How the hell did that situation occur? Surely I am entitled to prepare a suitable defence for myself before the hearing?

You misunderstand. Going to court does not mean literally going there in person, it means the entire process from the initial application to the final outcome. Somewhere in between you will be given the opponents evidence against you before you go there in person.

da_rule

Byelaws are set out in such a way that they can be enforced by companies/councils, and this enforcement can then be farmed out to a 3rd party. As it is a magistrates court issue then there may be some rules regarding disclosure nearer the hearing if it goes that far. I imagine the evidence won't be much more than a few photos and maybe a witness statement from a parking attendant.

ParkingPhil

So basically I am completely stuffed. I have no right to see the evidence against me without starting the court process. Train operating companies have been handed a law on a plate which is a licence to print money and they do not have to show what their PCN amounts would be. I have checked POFA and it seems they are exempt because there is a byelaw for them. They could presumably pick a number out of the air like £100k for a charge and it would be legally enforceable.


Maybe I should pay the £90 and take Meteor to small claims court for fraudulently making up a parking contravention and see if they can come up with any evidence there. At least I wouldn't have to pay their costs for that. It probably wouldn't work, though, would it?

da_rule

South Eastern will have the legal power to enforce the bye laws, and they can authorise another company/body, in this case Meteor to carry out the actual enforcement. You have at them moment been offered a way to end the matter at a reduced way, in the same way as if you get council parking ticket. Does the notice give you any information on whether there's a route of appeal? If so it can only be on a point of law, or possible a technical defence based around the notice being incorrectly issued.

ParkingPhil

No there is no appeal. I have checked the train company's web site and once Meteor have passed it onto Southeastern after a certain number of days the appeal process is over. The only options I am given are pay or go to court. I see no reason why they won't do it either. The get the charge and their expenses.


I just wish I could see the evidence against me. It doesn't sound unreasonable. I didn't keep the ticket because I had no reason to. Maybe it was clearly visible, maybe it wasn't. I don't know if a court would accept my argument that no PCN was available to the driver at the time. People can't appeal what they don't know about.


This strikes me as another opportunity for a company to use drivers as a cash cow.

da_rule

It's essentially the same as say being given a speeding ticket. You have no right to examine the evidence when you're given the ticket. Your options are, either you admit 'guilt' and pay, or you decide your not guilty and opt to go to court where you can test their evidence. I use speeding as an example because when you get pulled over you have no right to be shown things like the calibration evidence for the speed detection device used, or any video footage etc. If you genuinely had a ticket and you were parked in the correct area of the car park (in a bay, not in a staff part etc) then maybe push for your day in court BUT if you lose prepare to be hit with about £300 worth of fines/costs. Also, it depends what type of pay and display machine this station operates (i.e. does it require you to put in your number plate etc) as to what evidence they may be able to produce to prove non-payment.

HO87

TrickyWicky wrote: »

You misunderstand. Going to court does not mean literally going there in person, it means the entire process from the initial application to the final outcome. Somewhere in between you will be given the opponents evidence against you before you go there in person.

Unfortunately not. Current disclosure rules now mean that beyond a Statement of Facts as disclosed on the summons the prosecution is under no obligation to disclose the evidence it intends to rely on unless and until a not guilty plea is entered. And even then they do not need to disclose everything (unused material etc etc).

@OP

I admit that I am interpreting what you have said but were you issued with a Notice to Driver at the time of the alleged offence by Meteor? Was that ticket laid out as a Byelaw Penalty or simply as a parking charge notice?

If it was the former then the Byelaws make no provision for a penalty to be applied to the driver and so that was likely to be an otherwise typical PPC PCN which would provide for an appeal with POPLA as a long-stop. Besides that, potentially, a driver could be pursued for the byelaw offence. The only sanction that can be applied to the keeper is the penalty "as displayed in the area" and beyond that there isn't actually any offence of non-payment of the penalty unless they were to use the catch-all offence at Byelaw 24(1).

However, it would appear that is not the offence that L&SER are alleging. They are alleging a breach of byelaw 14(3) which can only be committed by the driver not by the keeper. This is the dilemma that has been discussed many times before - particularly on PePiPoo - as suggested in my previous post. No one has successfully defended one of these cases so far but then no one has been represented and, to be honest, I'm not entirely sure that those that have been forearmed to some degree actually understood the argument or court procedures well enough to exploit the glaring hole in their case.

Again, I thoroughly recommend that the OP takes themselves off to PePiPoo for more expert guidance.

da_rule

Bylaw 14(4)(i) does introduce owner liability.