Parking Eye, Sankt Augustin Retail Park, Grantham

bod1467

g0wfv wrote: »

Not sure if I read somewhere that planning consent turned out to be a red herring in that the council didn't have to issue consent under certain circumstances?

Planning consent for cameras is one thing. Consent for signage over a certain size viewable from a public road is subject to The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007. Breach of this act is (I believe) a criminal offence.

g0wfv

An update from my FoI request ...

Dear X

RE: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000


Thank you for your request under the freedom of Information Act 2000 dated 18 August 2015.

Our response is as follows.

There are two cameras at the site. One is attached to an existing lamp post and as such is exempt from planning control. The second camera is pole mounted and would require planning permission. However, it was installed prior to April 2011 and as it has been in place for more than 4 years it has become exempt from any planning enforcement action and is now lawful.

The signage on the site does require advertisement consent. This matter will be investigated by our planning enforcement team and they will keep you informed of their investigation.

As the cameras have not been the subject of any formal applications for planning permission the Council does not have any decision notices or any other correspondence.

I have submitted my intent to appeal to POPLA (London Councils) and will have to wait till at least 14 Sep before I hear from the new POPLA service provider, Omudsmen Services Ltd before I can submit my evidence. In the mean time, London Councils should inform the PPC so as to delay further action until the appeal can be heard.

At the very least, if PE did not apply for planning consent for the cameras, one is assuming they also did not apply for advertisement consent for the signage. If this is the case, does that make the signage potentially non-compliant with the BPA COC?

I shall draft something to that effect to add to my appeal evidence, but has anybody got a suitable ditty already to go that would suit this situation? It's probably going to be worded much better than anything I can come up with having read some of the pearls on this site!

g0wfv

Interestingly, there are a couple of articles from 2011 in the local rag relating to this retail park and ParkingEye. I wonder if it's worth re-opening the can of worms and highlighting my case ...

http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/local/parking-mad-1-2703094
http://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/business/business-news/time-limit-increases-at-grantham-car-park-1-2724099

Northlakes

A form of words like this may be appropriate for the POPLA/OS appeal,

(This is under the signage appeal)

In order to ascertain the ownership of the car park the driver contacted South Kesteven Council. A request was made to find any planning (or other) permissions relating to this site and in particular to the signage as required under The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007.
An official at the planning department stated that no such application had been received or permissions granted.
The British Parking Association code of practice states the following,
2.4 When there is relevant legislation and related guidance,
this will define the overall standard of conduct for all AOS
members. All AOS members must be aware of their legal
obligations and implement the relevant legislation and
guidance when operating their businesses.
The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 states in 5-3-b
(b) it concerns any failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with, if—
(i) the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by that code of conduct, and
(ii) the commitment is firm and capable of being verified and is not aspirational,
I put Parking Eye Ltd to strict proof that these regulations and codes of practice have been adhered to in this case.

I would the attach a copy of the answer to your FOI request to your appeal.

Ralph-y

The forum advice is to appeal ....

and...

complain to the car park owner / landlord for a dismissal ....

anything that helps this forward is good

so ... if you can get the local papers on side ... it helped with the last campaign

Ralph:cool:

g0wfv

Email to the local papers sent!

Ralph, Thanks mate. I've already submitted the intent to appeal to POPLA, however with the current switch to Ombudsmen Services, everything is on hold till at least 14 Sep. I shall carry on building evidence and appeal points until they contact me!

g0wfv

I have also replied to the original FOI response asking to be pointed in the direction of the legislation that legitimises the camera without planning consent after 4 years and also if they are able to provide me with details of the landowner as my own investigations have drawn a blank.

Marktheshark

Where people have pulled councils on allowing the law to be broken on planning, the councils response is usually to let them do as they like, roll over and let PE tickle their bellies.
Laws are only for Joe public

g0wfv

Boy do I feel the idiot! All the un-acknowledged letters and dead ends I've pursued trying to find the landowner or manager and the answer was right under my nose ...

Email to Cushman & Wakefield sent!

g0wfv

UPDATE:

So one of my 7 letters sent to the retailers/land owner/management agency has been replied to!

The landowner, Buckminster Estate, sub-lets to another company, South Yorkshire Pensions Authority (who I assume engaged C&W to manage the retail outlets and PE to 'manage' the car park)

Email now sent to SYPA!

Now that I have some more Google search terms to play with I have found the following thread on Pepipoo which relates to PE and this site.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87546&st=20

In that instance SYPA had PE cancel the charge, so after a chain of letters to 3 different organisations being referred at each stage, perhaps I have finally been referred to the right person!