NHS Staff parking fine

Mike172

Why would the trust, who act as a PPC, ticket their own employees?

Jed_Exodus

Redx wrote: »

an FOI from you may make them sit up a bit

see fergies long running apcoa and trust saga thread, over 400 posts now

I had a look at that thread, what info would you suggest I ask for?

Jed_Exodus

Mike172 wrote: »

Why would the trust, who act as a PPC, ticket their own employees?

Because it makes a few extra £££'s for the management Christmas p*** up. The staff already pay a lot of money to park at work. Its worth mentioning that the public car park changed from pay and display to pay on foot with a barrier exit recently, so the ticketers are only employed now to catch out staff. Its disgusting really.

Redx

Jed_Exodus wrote: »

I had a look at that thread, what info would you suggest I ask for?

I wouldnt suggest anything to you at all, other than to read what others have asked for and employ similar tactics

if people like fergie or others wish to help you and tell you what to ask for , then sobeit, I have no problem with other people providing the specifics , but I am not experienced in that fiield to actually make the suggested questions up for you , I leave that to you or to others

my point is that if you took up the reins like fergie did, you may find no contract exists or all kinds of other issues like he did , so possibly asking the questions he has asked would help your case and make life hard for them

fergie did reply in a similar manner this week to somebody who was being taken to court, where he provided the sorts of questions to ask

so my point is, do something similar

the trouble is , you are now asking me for those questions, but its not my field

think of it this way

if you had asked how you can get from england to tenerife in 4.5 hours, I would tell you to book a flight on an airplane

if you then asked me how to fly this airplane, I would say , dont know , ask a pilot, I usually let them do the actual work of getting me there

if you said , how do I book with easyjet or ryanair, I would say , dont know (never used them) so google it or ring them up and ask them

so I may know a good idea for you to use, doesnt mean I can do it or have done it though

good luck whatever you decide

Redx

Jed_Exodus wrote: »

Its worth mentioning that the public car park changed from pay and display to pay on foot with a barrier exit recently, so the ticketers are only employed now to catch out staff. Its disgusting really.

this is the type of parking management set out by Jeremy Hunt in his autumn statement on it last summer , although he meant for both public and staff alike

Jed_Exodus

Thanks for your help.

System

You can simply ask if this has been updated

https://app.box.com/s/6686bjh0t22oah3g2htb

Redx

found it , read this (but dont ask me questions about what they said , lol)

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5174795

post #11

Jed_Exodus

Hmmm, its helpful but the difference is the trust is the PPC so would have no contract with an outsider, however I guess I could ask about the profits etc

Jed_Exodus

I've drafted a letter to the CE of the trust

Dear Mr Bain

Ref parking ticket no ******

I'm writing to complain about a parking charge I have been issued at the William Harvey Hospital that I feel is unfair.

The car was parked in the staff car park and displaying a valid staff parking permit. The ticket was placed on the windscreen, however I am informed by the driver that the car was parked in a parking space and in accordance with the rules of the car park.

As registered keeper of the vehicle I decided to wait until I received a "notice to keeper" before appealing. On receiving the notice I appealed immediately by email to the only contact details listed on the notice which was for a company called PCN Parking Solutions. My appeal email is copied be!ow.

!!!!!! _________________________________

Date!10/1/2015

Dear Sirs

Re:!PCN!No.!*****

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car, on these main grounds:

a). The sum does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term. It is a disguised penalty and not commercially justified.
b). As keeper I believe that the signs were not seen, the wording is ambiguous and the predominant purpose of your business model is intended to be a deterrent.
c). There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
d). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
e). There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.
f). This is not a 'parking ticket' - it is an unsolicited invoice with as much merit as the publicly-derided £100 taken unlawfully from customers by a dingy Blackpool Hotel.!

Your clients should be thoroughly ashamed of the shoddy way that you treat patients and staff members visiting their premises, people that are either sick and in need of help or those hard working professionals who help the sick and needy. The landowner will be made fully aware of this matter and your response, which I will forward to their CEO when I complain in writing and via social media, as appropriate.!

Parking firms like yours fail to demonstrate even a basic understanding of customer service. The reputation of your business model appears to be more akin to a protection racket than 'parking management'. Your ATA may offer sound-bites about driving up standards or fight for motorists' rights but in reality they are not a regulator; they merely exist to represent the interests of paying members, in order to gain access to DVLA data. The public have no faith in the private parking industry and, as far as I have seen, your firm has not shown itself to be any different than the ex-clampers with whom you share a membership.!

The purpose of this communication is:

1. Formal challenge
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. As such, you must either rely on the POFA 2012 or cancel the charge. I suggest you uphold this challenge now or alternatively, send a rejection letter - subject to accepting my claim for costs as clearly stated below, since you have no case.!

2. ''Drop hands'' offer
The extravagant 'parking charge' is baseless but I realise that you may have incurred nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs to date, for researching the law and responding to your junk mail dressed up to impersonate a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15. Therefore, this is a formal!“drop hands”!offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days without further expense and I will not pursue you for!mycosts. If you persist then I will charge in full for my time at £18 per hour plus my out-of-pocket expenses and damages for harassment.!

3. Notice of cancellation of contract
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered by you and certainly was not expressly agreed. This 'contract' is hereby cancelled and any obligations now end. If you offer - and if I decide to use - IAS or POPLA, then the contract ends immediately on the date of their decision (whatever the outcome) so my notice of cancellation still applies. The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations apply now to every consumer contract, save for a few exemptions, which parking contracts are not. It is the will of Parliament following the EU Consumer Rights Directive, that!express consent!is obtained for consumer contracts now - not implied consent - and that information is provided in a durable medium in advance.!

You have failed to meet these requirements. The foisting of unexpected contracts like this on consumers, by stealth, is a thing of the past.

By replying to the challenge you are acknowledging receipt and acceptance of points 2 and 3 above. If you decide to persist with this unwarranted threat, I will be put to unnecessary expense and hours of time in appealing or defending this matter. As such, you will be liable for my costs and a pre-estimate of my loss - and in contrast with yours, mine is genuine - is that this sum will be likely to exceed £100.

I have kept proof of submission of this challenge. I look forward to your considered reply within 35 days.

Yours faithfully,

Mr

!!!!!!! __________________________

I then received the following email back

!!!!!!!! ___________________________

Dear Mr

Thank you for your email, the contents of which have been noted.

Once we have an outcome of your appeal we will contact you.

Kindest Regards,

M

▶ Show quoted text

--!

Regards

PCN Parking Solutions

!!!!!!! ________________________________

So I awaited the outcome of my appeal thinking no other actions were required, so it was to my surprise when I received the following from PCN Parking Solutions.

!!!!! __________________________________

Dear

PCN Reference:

Thank you for your recent correspondence, the contents of which have been noted.

For the avoidance of doubt, we have been instructed by our Client, named above, in relation to an outstanding Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) which was issued by our Client East Kent Hospitals NHS Trust.

We are advised by our Client that upon the issue of the PCN, and in line with the requirements of the relevant Approved Trade Association, of which our Client is a member, a period of time was given in which the recipient was able to make representation against the issue of the PCN. We would confirm that no such representation!was received within the specified time period, and so the matter has been passed to us for recovery purposes.

Full details of our clients claim have been sent to you by them previously.

We would urge you to contact us on!03450 737209!within the next 14 days to resolve this matter without the need for further action on our part.

--!

Kindest Regards

PCN Parking Solutions

!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ___________________________________

So my appeal had been ignored I thought, it was only when seeking advice online that I found out I needed to appeal to the trust and that PCN Parking Solutions are nothing more than a debt collector. But how was I to appeal to the trust when their details hadn't been provided to me as the keeper of the vehicle? In digging deeper I found out that these Notice to Keeper's are governed by Paragraph 9 of the Protection of Freedoms act which has the following clause.

(h)identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made

The notice to keeper I received did not specify how I could notify the creditor (the trust) but only how I could notify the debt collector. This would deem this notice void as a legal document and would not stand up in court. Therefore I will not be disclosing who was driving my car on that day because as far as I'm concerned there was no offence and the charge should be dropped.

Further to this, I think its disgusting that you would treat your hard working staff in this manner. They already pay an extortionate amount of money to use the car park, only to have the trust try and levy these charges against them when they have done nothing wrong. The ticketers in the car park are employed now solely employed to catch out staff as the public car park is now pay on foot and thus they are not needed in this car park.

The contact details for the parking department are deliberately hidden to avoid challenges in the hope people will just pay up and move on.

I will also be writing to Damian Green MP and also the MP's for Dover, Folkestone, Canterbury and Margate to inform them of the trusts disgusting behaviour. I will also be contacting Kent Messenger as I know they have taken an interest in hospital staff parking in recent months.

I would like confirmation that this charge is cancelled as soon as possible and would also ask that you request PCN Parking Solution cease contact with me on this matter.

Kind regards

Any thoughts please????