GEMINI Parking Solutions

luke123456

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Do you believe that the 'P' blue entrance sign behind the girl with the umbrella on the left of one of their photos is there? I don't, it looks photoshopped on at a weird angle and they've covered the location up. It's not at the right angle for where they've suggested it is placed and it seems the pole holding it disappears behind the girl's leg but has no base in the grass at the right angle to match the sign.

Is it just me?

I see what you mean....I will ask my friend to go back to the hospital and photograph the entrance to the car park herself. If I submit the appeal tonight, can I add photos as evidence to my appeal to POPLA a day or so later?

luke123456

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Point 2 is repeated in point 6, so you don't need both but you appear to have missed out 'no keeper liability'? I thought this was the keeper appealing, no driver admitted, so the slam dunk obvious first appeal point is always going to be about the POFA.

Do you mean something like this;

The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA 2012 - no keeper liability.

Gemini has failed to comply with POFA. Schedule 4 paragraph 8 of the POFA stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Failure to comply with paragraph 6 means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver. The NTK issued by Gemini
on five counts:
• 8(2)(a) – there is no mention of the period of parking to which the notice relates. It mentions the date and time of the event but gives no indication of how long the car was parked there, thus the period of parking.
• 8(2)(b) – the notice does not advise that the driver is liable for the parking charge and the amount and that it has not been paid in full
• 8(2)(c) – the notice does not state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given
• 8(2)(g) - the notice does not inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payments
• 8(2)(i) – the notice does not specify the date of on which the notice was sent. While it does have a date of issue, this give no indication as to when the notice was sent.

As the Notice to Keeper fails to meet these requirements, the keeper cannot be held liable.

luke123456

Fruitcake wrote: »

Minor typo here needs clarifying. (In the second long paragraph of section 3.)


Also, somewhere in the BPA CoP it mentions that a PCN should be cancelled once a PPC has been made aware that one of the occupants was a blue badge holder.
More work for you to include I know, but you are throwing the kitchen sink at them you might as well include the dirty water as well.

Where can I get more on this from??

Fruitcake

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Is it worth you adding this map as another attachment for POPLA to show them the car park on the top left and the fact that disabled people are expected to cross the road and enter the other building, then cross back again to display the Badge they've been asked to take over the road, etc.:

http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/files.royalfree.nhs.uk/CFH_redevelopment/Map_of_CFH.pdf

Do you believe that the 'P' blue entrance sign behind the girl with the umbrella on the left of one of their photos is there? I don't, it looks photoshopped on at a weird angle and they've covered the location up. It's not at the right angle for where they've suggested it is placed and it seems the pole holding it disappears behind the girl's leg but has no base in the grass at the right angle to match the sign.

Is it just me?

I've blown that image up and there does appear to be a base to the right hand post, but it doesn't line up vertically with the upper part of the post. Also, why has part of it been blanked out? Why have a sign saying "welcome to ..." with the location obliterated unless it was from somewhere else.


A visit to the hospital would confirm the existence of the sign. If it isn't there, then complaints to hospital, BPA and DVLA would be the minimum needed.


Asking the PPC for a map showing the positions of signs would be useful as well.

Coupon-mad

luke123456 wrote: »

Do you mean something like this;

The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA 2012 - no keeper liability.

Gemini has failed to comply with POFA. Schedule 4 paragraph 8 of the POFA stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Failure to comply with paragraph 6 means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver. The NTK issued by Gemini
on five counts:
• 8(2)(a) – there is no mention of the period of parking to which the notice relates. It mentions the date and time of the event but gives no indication of how long the car was parked there, thus the period of parking.
• 8(2)(b) – the notice does not advise that the driver is liable for the parking charge and the amount and that it has not been paid in full
• 8(2)(c) – the notice does not state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given
• 8(2)(g) - the notice does not inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payments
• 8(2)(i) – the notice does not specify the date of on which the notice was sent. While it does have a date of issue, this give no indication as to when the notice was sent.

As the Notice to Keeper fails to meet these requirements, the keeper cannot be held liable.

Yes but not paragraph 8, a postal PCN comes under paragraph 9. I'm writing something for you now so patience (LOL...patients...!).

Your PCN looks to have arrived LATE, after day 15 from 13th December?!

luke123456

You are right, they have blanked out that sign, but not bothered to blank out peoples faces, or vehicle reg plates....all a bit dodgy right....?

Fruitcake

luke123456 wrote: »

Where can I get more on this from??

BPA CoP should be on their website. I'll see if I can find anything myself but I am skiving at work whilst my team leader is out the office so may not complete the search before finishing time. :eek::D:rotfl:

Fruitcake

BPA CoP section 16.5


16.5 If your landowner provides a concession that allows
parking for disabled people, if a vehicle displays a valid
Blue Badge you must not issue it with parking charge.


In other words, if you displayed your BB when you parked, the PPC shouldn't have issued a PCN in the first place. Note the words, you must not. That seems pretty straight forward to me.


Ah, it's an out of date CoP from 2012 but I'm sure it is still valid. I'll have another butchers.

luke123456

Fruitcake wrote: »

BPA CoP section 16.5

Ah, it's an out of date CoP from 2012 but I'm sure it is still valid. I'll have another butchers.

Unfortunately I just had a look at the 2015 CoP and it only goes up to 16.4, so that point is no longer mentioned.

But I could always say that the CoP in 2012 stated....

Fruitcake

Well that is downright sneaky and underhanded.


Paragraph 16.5 has been deleted from later versions of the CoP.


Version 6 from October 2015 has no para 16.5