Grace period

BJ63

salmosalaris wrote: »

but has he ?
need to see the original appeal
If all he said was I paid that does not identify the driver . But would he be the contracting party still ?
I'd just leave it in , no harm done if they reject that point anyway

Just checked the original appeal and it does appear that I identified myself as the driver and I am listed as the Driver Keeper on the information submitted from PE. In which case, should I remove all of section 6?
Believe me, I want nothing more than to get on with my life, so I'm extremely grateful for all your advice and I will breathe a huge sigh of relief when this is finally submitted and then hopefully followed by a successful outcome.

salmosalaris

salmosalaris wrote: »

no offence intended :-), but IMHO the OP doesn't need to mess around with this anymore. There's enough in there to at least make things a little tricky if POPLA do have to assess this.
Send it off and get on with life .

Leave out section 6 then

Coupon-mad

salmosalaris wrote: »

I've done it and edited my post

Nice work, that appeal!

I am listed as the Driver Keeper on the information submitted from PE.

What do you mean? I thought they only sent such info to POPLA at evidence pack stage?

BJ63

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Nice work, that appeal!



What do you mean? I thought they only sent such info to POPLA at evidence pack stage?

Sorry, I may not have made it clear but it is already at that stage. My initial appeal, without the benefit of advice from this forum, merely focused on the timings of the payment by phone and entrance and exit times recorded on the ANPR camera. I have received the case file notes / evidence pack from POPLA and now have until Thursday to provide my comments on the file.
I hope this misunderstanding doesn't mean all your help has been in vain 😳

salmosalaris

Ah
No still submit it as your response with copies of your evidence ( phone record etc)

I would e mail this response to POPLA as characters are limited and you cannot send attachments via the portal .
In the comments about operator evidence box write that your response and attachments have been e mailed to them

Make sure you check back in with the result , POPLA and PE can't duck this one ;-)

Also take a screenshot of the response box containing your comments and contact POPLA to ensure they received your e mail

Guys_Dad

For future reference and help to others, I would make a little more of this, in case the point gets swallowed up by other points or unclear wording.

Start off by saying.
"
The PPC has decided to issue a ticket based purely on the recorded entry and exit times of their ANPR system.

However, the BPA Code of Practice demands that additional time upon entry and further time upon exit, should be allowed.

The code states with reference to these additional grace periods
Prior to parking:-

13.2 You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.

Upon returning to the vehicle:-

13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.

I suggest that taking into account walking to and from the relevant notices in the car park, reading and understanding the various t&c, which the assessor will note are numerous, a minimum of 3-5 minutes should be permitted, and when added to the minimum time of 10 minutes specified in 13.4, any charges for parking less than 15 minutes over the ANPR recorded maximum time are not allowed under the BPA Code of Practice and, as a result, my appeal must be allowed. "


Addition.

The IPC have something similar but don't actually specify the time.

From the IPC Code of Practice

15. Grace Periods
15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so
they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
15.2 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to leave a site after a pre-paid or
permitted period of parking has expired.

In the absence of any time periods in the IAS CoP, reference to the BPA times in the BPA CoP should be made and an argument using the same times used for a IPC/IAS appeal.

Guys_Dad

Bump.

The IPC CoP re Grace periods has been added to the previous post.

4consumerrights

@ Guys Dad - have you cross posted or skim read?

As far as this is clear this OP has a Parking Eye parking charge therefore the IPC Code of Practice is not really relevant IMO...

4consumerrights

BJ63 wrote: »

Sorry, I may not have made it clear but it is already at that stage. My initial appeal, without the benefit of advice from this forum, merely focused on the timings of the payment by phone and entrance and exit times recorded on the ANPR camera. I have received the case file notes / evidence pack from POPLA and now have until Thursday to provide my comments on the file.
I hope this misunderstanding doesn't mean all your help has been in vain 😳

If this is a rebuttal, then you need to amend some of the "appeal points"

Did Parking Eye supply a contract ?
If so is it legible?
Query - dates - any redacted parts etc.


If they submitted a witness statement then that needs rebutting.

Have they provided evidence of accurate timings?

You need to challenge the photographic evidence and also the pictures of signage they supply - these are close up views of the signs and texts and are taken out of context on location.

Guys_Dad

4consumerrights wrote: »

@ Guys Dad - have you cross posted or skim read?

As far as this is clear this OP has a Parking Eye parking charge therefore the IPC Code of Practice is not really relevant IMO...

No not misread. My post was initially was for a BPA PPC. However, as I wrote at the start "For future reference and help to others, I would make a little more of this, in case the point gets swallowed up by other points or unclear wording."

I thought I would bookmark the post in case another similar arose, and then researched what the IPC's CoP said about Grace periods in the event that a IPC PPC case arose in due course or in case anyone reading had a similar problem with an IPC member.