Flabberghasted: Premier Park PCN. Guidance Needed on incorrect Reg Plate no entered..

rshome123

Hi,

Some time ago, I received a PCN letter from Premier Park about a stay in a car park, but with no explanation of why. £100 charge, £60 if settled early.

I had retained the ticket fortunately (£1 for 2 hours), which in conjunction with the photo evidence provided in the PCN letter (photos of my vehicle entering and exiting the car park, with timestamp) showed that I had duly paid for the parking time within the rules (or so I thought!).

I followed the Premier Park appeal process (including a scanned image of the parking ticket), which was duly rejected, and then appealed to POPLA (with the same evidence).

The POPLA appeal was also rejected (see below for a copy of POPLA verdict) on the ground that the vehicle registration was incorrectly entered. I had no recollection of entering the vehicle reg incorrectly, but on inspecting the parking ticket, I noticed the letters 'DG', which are the first two letters of my car, suggesting I either entered incorrectly, or the machine was at fault.

I am furious that POPLA would reject this appeal because...

a) The ticket (stamped '11:14' and expiry time '13:14') and the PCN photo/timestamps (11:13 entry and 13:03 exit) are clearly one and the same parking occurrence to anyone with reasonable common sense.

b) Why would a parking ticket machine allow a ticket to be printed if only 2 letters/digits had been entered ? Similarly, would every person who incorrectly entered their vehicle reg, even by one letter/digit difference, be liable for a PCN from Premier Park? Surely this can't be considered reasonable ?

c) POPLA could have just requested from Premier Park, a simple list of vehicle registration and entry/exit times just before and after the entry/exit times of my vehicle. This would prove without doubt that my parking ticket does indeed link to the parking event.

Surely Premier Park cannot expect to get away with this.

So, advice needed about what to do now. I intend not to pay the £100 PCN, but need to know where I stand on this ?

Help much appreciated.

Here's the verdict that POPLA gave...

DecisionUnsuccessful
Assessor NameLauren Bailey
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the appellant parked without making a valid payment.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that he paid £1 for 2 hours parking.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator monitors the site using Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR). The operator has provided photographs of the appellant’s vehicle entering the site at 11:13 and exiting at 13:03 on 14 April 2016. The appellant has stated that he made a payment of £1 for parking for two hours. The operator has issued the parking charge, as the appellant did not make a valid payment for parking. The operator has provided a system printout that confirms the appellant’s vehicle was not registered on the date in question. The operator has provided photographs of the signs at the site. The signs state, “Please enter the full correct registration of your vehicle at the payment terminals”. Within Section 18.1 of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice, it states, “A driver who uses your private car park with your permission does so under a licence or contract with you. If they park without your permission this will usually be an act of trespass. In all cases, the driver’s use of your land will be governed by your terms and conditions, which the driver should be made aware of from the start. You must use signs to make it easy for them to find out what your terms and conditions are.” Furthermore, Section 18.3 of the BPA Code of Practice states, “You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand.” I consider the photographic evidence to show that the operator met the minimum standards set by the BPA. I also consider it clear that the vehicle registration must be entered correctly. When parking on private land it is the responsibility of the motorist to comply with the terms and conditions of parking set out in the signage at the site. Whilst I accept that the appellant made a payment for parking, the signs state that the correct vehicle registration must be entered. On this occasion, the appellant has parked without correctly registering the vehicle, as such; I can only conclude that the operator issued the parking charge correctly.

bod1467

What exactly (redacted of personal info) was your POPLA appeal wording?

As I posted on the Decisions thread ... on the face of it, a waste of a POPLA appeal.

Your next step is to either pay or ignore everything except a formal LBA or actual court papers. (That mean ignore any debt collector bog paper too. DO NOT some back and tell us about every letter you get from DRP etc.). A POPLA decision is binding only on the PPC, not the motorist.

rshome123

I tried to retrieve my POPLA appeal wording from their website, as I didn't make a local copy of it. I'm not able to find any reference to it (frustrated). From memory, the wording would have been using similar logic as in the prior appeal to Premier Park, a copy of which is shown below...

To: Premier Parking

I received a PCN letter from yourselves today, in which you alleged I was liable for a parking charge (Ref: XXXXXX), after having parked at Arpley Road car park in Warrington.

I am at a loss to understand why you sent the letter, as ticket was purchased for parking (£1 for 2 hours), and exited the car park within the time paid for.

I have attached a scan of the ticket. As you can see, the vehicle left the car park at 13:03, after staying for 1 hour 50 minutes.

I therefore contest this demand.

Umkomaas

A charge made on the basis of a failure to enter a correct (complete) VRM can only be a penalty. A breach of the terms where the penalty clause could not be disengaged would mean only a GPEOL could be claimed. And a GPEOL is never going to add up to £100!

Did you include GPEOL in your appeal?

bod1467

I'm guessing the OP's appeal was as brief as post #3 ... a wasted appeal.

rshome123

Umkomaas thanks but I'm not even sure what a GPEOL is, so I didn't include it in any appeal.

Edit: Google search reveals GPEOL means GENUINE PRE ESTIMATE OF LOSSES APPEAL, although on reading up on it I'm still unsure of what it is.

Umkomaas

rshome123 wrote: »

Umkomaas thanks but I'm not even sure what a GPEOL is, so I didn't include it in any appeal.

Edit: Google search reveals GPEOL means GENUINE PRE ESTIMATE OF LOSSES APPEAL, although on reading up on it I'm still unsure of what it is.

Of little relevance now unless they issue court papers.

rshome123

Your replies are appreciated, but what can I expect to happen next, and how in your opinions should I play it ?

Umkomaas

There's no more you can do. It's their move next, so just wait and see. Probably toothless debt collector letters (see newbies sticky post #4 for how to deal with debt collectors).

If the PPC (not the debt collector, because they can't) is to issue a court claim (this isn't a prosecution, just a small claim to be decided by a Judge), you should receive from the PPC a Letter Before Court Claim (but not always) to warn you of impending court proceedings, then followed by real court papers.

Don't worry about this because help is at hand here and on PePiPoo if court papers are issued, but cross that bridge only if necessary.

Only around 1% of tickets issued ever gets to court.

bod1467

Umkomaas wrote: »

Only around 1% of tickets issued ever gets to court.

And most of those 1% are from ParkingEye.

Ralph-y

where was the car park ?

retail / supermarket / hospital ?

Ralph:cool: