National Park Authority managing parking for a private land owner

Kathymel

Hello.

Our local authority is a National Park. They manage some land in our village for a local private estate. The estate is well respected and does good works around the village, including allowing the villagers to use estate land for free. The central car park is part of this land, managed, under covenant, for the estate on behalf of the village. This week the National Park have begun charging for parking, having persuaded the estate that this is in the interests of the village.

The locals are up in arms about this and feel the authority are not acting in the interests of the village. Various protests have been suggested, including a mass park-in.

So, my question is this:

Given that it is not possible to dispute parking charges where the local authority is both owner and operator, what are the rules where the local authority is acting for a private landowner, and, does any of the parking charge advice that relates to private companies managing land not owned by them apply here?

Thanks for your thoughts on this. Kathy

Johno100

Kathymel wrote: »

Our local authority is a National Park.

Are you sure about that? Do you pay your Council Tax to the National Park and do you elect local councillors to sit on the National Park?

Kathymel

The Park is our Local Planning Authority, but we pay Council Tax to the local council. I suppose the point I'm making is, it's a government-funded body rather than a private parking company, so does the advice change?

I've just found a BBC news item from 2010 that says 'The park has no statutory powers to enforce payment' Wonder if that still stands?

Johno100

A National Park, just like most other quasi-government bodies such as a hospital trust, doesn't have the statutory powers that a local council has to issue Fixed Penalty Notices. If they are intent on trying to enforce payment (things have moved on since 2010) then they are either going to have to farm this out to a Private Parking Company or attempt to do it in-house, either way it is a 'private' and not a 'council' ticket and should be treated as such if one is received (read the Newbies sticky).

BTW how are they taking/enforcing payment, e.g. manned barrier, Pay and Display, ANPR cameras, pay on exit with barrier? And are there any signs in place?

Johno100

And one other point, if your complaints to the National Park about this scheme are falling on deaf ears then perhaps a few dozen well worded letters from local villagers, district and/or parish councillors and County Councillors to the owners of the private estate telling them what a bad idea it is may result in a change of mind and scupper the whole thing.

Kathymel

Thank you for that info, Johno. Good to hear they don't have statutory powers of enforcement.

They always do their parking in-house. I used to be very good friends with the chap who ran the NP car parks several years ago. He said his only option was to write a polite letter if payment failed to arrive after the windscreen ticket. Perhaps it is still the same.

There are no barriers, cameras or people enforcing the charge, just a machine and a sign.

There will be plenty of letters and there is press interest, too. We believe that evidence presented to persuade the estate to remove the covenant may have been somewhat ... inaccurate.

Umkomaas

They always do their parking in-house. I used to be very good friends with the chap who ran the NP car parks several years ago. He said his only option was to write a polite letter if payment failed to arrive after the windscreen ticket. Perhaps it is still the same.

You'd be surprised just how many people will supinely genuflect to such authority - and cough up. Especially the elderly, the frail, infirm and confused.

Kathymel

A wee update.

A car park attendant was in evidence today. He said that non-payers would be pursued through the small claims court if they failed to respond to the two reminders they would send.

Opinions on whether that is likely?

pogofish

What company is he issuing tickets for?

That's more important than anything else in determining the likleyhood of any court action. Some do court a lot, others only occasionally and many will never go beyond threatening letters from powerless debt collectors.

Kathymel

Hi Pogofish. He works for the National Park. They operate their own car parks.

ColliesCarer

Kathymel wrote: »

A wee update.

A car park attendant was in evidence today. He said that non-payers would be pursued through the small claims court if they failed to respond to the two reminders they would send.

Opinions on whether that is likely?

I'm no expert but whilst NP continue to manage the car park themselves I think it's highly unlikely.

The only person they could pursue is the driver of the vehicle and they do not know who that is.

So who are they going to send the reminders to and how would they get their details?

To get on-line access to DVLA records in order to get registered keeper details in time to stand any chance of complying with POFA 2012 Schedule 4 they would have to be members of either the IPC or the BPA AOS (which they don't appear to be).

Then to establish a right to pursue the keeper, they would have to send out NtK's that comply with the statutory requirements of POFA 2012, offer their own appeals process, and access to a second independant appeals process (for which they have to pay £27+vat) if they decide to reject the appeal to themselves. The keeper would then have to lose the 2nd stage appeal before further action could be pursued against them.

But as they are not members of either trade body, all they could do is make paper applications to the DVLA for keeper details and by the time they got a response they would more than likely be out of time to stand a chance of complying with the statutory requirements of POFA and could only pursue the driver - but they still wouldn't know who that was so ..........

They'd be back to square one.