Disabled parking ticket

Parkerman

Smart put ticket on my dad's car. It was parked in disabled bay at ASDA and his badge had slipped into the well so attendant could not see it. I went into the store to remonstrate, this proved useless. I was hopping mad and wanted to take £100 worth of groceries back in for refund. My dad would not let me as he began to feel unwell. Took him home. Have written very nasty letter to Asda HQ. I now need to word an appeal to Smart as well. Could someone help me with the exact wording for this type of incident where badge has slipped and ticket received ?

I don't really want to send this Smart outfit any copies of disabled badge or give them my dad's address or anything.

Been on newbie thing but maybe I've missed info for this type of ticket.

Cheers.

Redx

just use the template letter in post #1 , adding in the "rant" part that an occupant of the vehicle was a blue badge holder and that the parking charge should be cancelled

no naming the driver

well done on the head office complaint, I would have suggested that too , also complaining about the local shop and manager for not cancelling it

The_Deep

Write beastly things here

https://www.facebook.com/Asda

Marktheshark

Ask to see the CCTV, the goon on bonus might have rocked the car to make the badge slip.

enfield_freddy

Marktheshark wrote: »

Ask to see the CCTV, the goon on bonus might have rocked the car to make the badge slip.

from up his 40 ft pole , or do you mean the goon with a polaroid ?




that is not quite a AUTOMATIC number plate recognition camera

Ralph-y

this was part of a post written by one of the forums wise owls last year ....

it may start you on the right track ....

read through then adapt to suit

===================

EQUALITY ACT 2010 AND BREACH OF UTCCR 1999

For the avoidance of doubt, the registered keeper of this vehicle has 'Protected Characteristics' under the Equality Act and has a legal right to use any 'reasonable adjustment' provided by any landholder/client/operator when visiting a customer-facing environment, including car parks. The registered keeper was an occupant of the vehicle when it was parked at the location in question.

As you are aware, the Blue Badge scheme does not even lawfully apply in private car parks. Companies such as XYZ may well mention the Badge on your signs, ostensibly to pay lip-service to disability law and to make it easy for you to issue tickets for any transgression you might invent, but you cannot rely on it in isolation as the only indicator of disability need. And you are certainly wholly unjustified to harass a disabled visitor for the spurious reason that you seem to think that, suddenly, a disability disappears if a Blue Badge date is not visible (a copy of which is attached, because as keeper I am keen to resolve the issue and have better things to do than enter into protracted correspondence with a firm like XYZ).

Your terms on your signs are expressly unenforceable and if you disagree then I will show a District Judge that is the case, along with exposing the flaws in your Notice to Keeper, the non-compliance of your signage at the disabled bays at this site and the fact you have clearly made no loss.


EQUALITY ACT 2010

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 Contracting out

(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.

This is not a case of mitigating circumstances, this is primary disability law which takes precedence and which grants unequivocal rights which cannot be removed, nor restricted to certain groups, nor unilaterally changed or charged for on a whim, for your profit.

Any term that XYZ may have on your signs to the effect 'Blue Badges only' is wholly unreasonable and therefore null and void, if the effect is to deny a disabled person their statutory right to use a reasonable adjustment without penalty.

EQUALITY ACT 2010

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;
(c) 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;
(b) by terminating the provision of the service to B;
(c) by subjecting B to any other detriment.

As a company, XYZ has specifically breached your legal duties under the 'EHRC Equality Act Code of Practice for Service Providers' which has been law since 2011. 'Service Provider' is a term loosely associated with XYZ and certainly applies to your landowner/occupier client in this car park, who are being sent a copy of this letter.

I know that XYZ do not own this car park and you are acting merely as agents for the owner/occupier. If you progress this case to court you will be required among your evidence, to produce your contract or site agreement with the landowner and I will require XYZ to demonstrate how your contract and ownership status differs from that in the cases VCS v Ibbotson, Case No 1SE09849 (16/5/2012), ParkingEye v Sharma, Case No. 3QT62646 (23/10/2013) and ParkingEye v Gardam, Case No: 3QT60598 (14/11/2013).

I will also direct the Judge to the case of UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012 finding that the charges are a penalty) and Excel v Greenwood, Case Number 3QT60496 (4/10/2013) which was about a forgotten Blue Badge, where the Judge found that the Excel should have made reasonable adjustments once they knew about the disability.

When you saw the DVLA data and printed out a Notice to Keeper, you certainly already knew about the disability need - take a look at the address you sent the Notice to Keeper to which shows it as a 'Motability Vehicle'. You have already been told about the disability and have been given proof that a Blue Badge exists - so your breach of the Act is complete. Harassment is also a specific breach of the Equality Act as well, so choose your reply carefully as I am keeping all your letters, and those of your agents, safe in case they are needed in court.

I will of course defend this robustly in court and I reserve the right to claim against you, since the remedy for Equality Act 2010 breach is monetary damages with far more legal backing than your Parking Charge Notice.






=======================

Ralph:cool:

Parkerman

Many thanks for all the advice on this thread.

Coupon-mad

Parkerman wrote: »

Been on newbie thing but maybe I've missed info for this type of ticket.

That's because the facts don't matter. Send the template, win at POPLA in the end. DO NOT ADD ANYTHING ABOUT WHO WAS DRIVING!