Parking Eye - Parking Notice Charge for parking in Aldi, Bangor

Jo4

Am I supposed to actually state "there was very obviously NOT just one car caught there on 25 July 2016 because ParkingEye 'farm' car parks with dozens of victims, day in day out and make no money otherwise!)"?

Jo4

We only had 2,000 characters so we were as concise as we could be but yet tried to get our points across.

I will update here when we get a response but I hope they don't keep us waiting too long.

Jo4

We received the following response 2 weeks ago, on Monday 31st October 2016, but due to my Mum being rushed into hospital the night before I didn't get a change to go online,

Decision
Unsuccessful

Assessor Name
Daniel Kelley

Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the appellant remained on site for longer than permitted.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that the operator does not have the authority to issue Parking Charge Notices (PCN). The appellant state the operator has not complied with Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012. The appellant has advised that PoFA 2012 does not apply to registered keepers in Northern Ireland. The appellant has stated the signage on site is unclear and inadequate.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
After reviewing the evidence provided by both parties, I am not satisfied that the driver of the vehicle has been identified. The operator is therefore pursuing the registered keeper of the vehicle in this instance. For the operator to transfer liability for unpaid parking charges from the driver of the vehicle to the registered keeper of the vehicle, the regulations laid out in the PoFA 2012 must be adhered to. The operator has provided a copy of the Notice to Keeper sent. As the driver of the vehicle has not been identified, the Notice to Keeper will need to comply with section 9 of PoFA 2012. Having reviewed the evidence provided by the operator, I am satisfied that the Notice to Keeper has complied with the requirements of PoFA 2012. Therefore, I am satisfied that the operator can transfer the liability for the unpaid parking charge to the registered keeper of the vehicle. The appellant has advised that PoFA 2012 does not apply to registered keepers in Northern Ireland. However, the contravention happened in Wales and I am satisfied the operator can transfer liability to the keeper. The appellant has questioned the operator’s authority in issuing PCNs. Section 7.1 of the BPA Code of Practice informs parking operators that “if you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you authority to carry out all aspects of car park management for the site you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges.” The operator has provided a copy of the contract between itself and the landowner, which I am satisfied meets the minimum requirements set out by the BPA Code of Practice. The appellant has stated the signage on site is unclear and inadequate. The British Parking Association Code of Practice under, section 18.1 states, “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. The operator has provided me with photographic evidence of the signage located around the site in question. I am satisfied that this signage, displayed throughout the car park, clearly states the terms and conditions of the site. As such I am satisfied that appellant had the opportunity to read and understand the terms and conditions before agreeing to the contract. The signage states, “By entering this private car park, you consent, for the purpose of car park management to: the capturing of photographs of the vehicle and registration by the ANPR cameras … Furthermore, you consent to the processing of this data to request registered keeper details from the DVLA where the parking contract is not adhered to.” From the evidence provided to me by the operator and the appellant, it is clear that the operator has complied with section 18 “Signs” of British Parking Association Code of Practice. I note the appellant has raised new grounds for appeal in the comments he has provided on receipt of the operator’s evidence, however when we invited the appellant to make comments about the operator’s case file, this was not an opportunity for him to raise new grounds for appeal or provide any new evidence. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that when they enter a car park, they have understood the terms and conditions of parking. If the appellant was in disagreement with the terms and conditions of the site or felt that the terms and conditions of the site could not be complied with, there would have been sufficient time to leave the site without entering into a contract with the operator. By remaining parked on site, the appellant accepted the terms and conditions. On this occasion, the appellant has failed to follow the terms and conditions of the signage at the site and as such, I conclude that the operator issued the Parking Charge Notice correctly.

The_Deep

All that time, all that money, what a waste, and for what.


PE are unlikely to recoup a penny of their claim, they are unlikely to be able to go to court, Diabetes UK will probably make a stink, and Aldi will come out of it with egg on the faces.


I believe that, if the OP has a restricted licence due to his diabetes,and was the driver, had she have driven away in time s he may have been breaking the law anyway until her blood sugar level was stabilised.

fisherjim

The appellant has advised that PoFA 2012 does not apply to registered keepers in Northern Ireland. However, the contravention happened in Wales and I am satisfied the operator can transfer liability to the keeper.

Really? Good luck with that one then Parking Lie!

Fruitcake

Jo4, you are now in ignore mode. Do not respond to anything at all from parking lie, or debt collectors.
In the very unlikely event that you get court papers issued for a NI court, please come back and let us know, otherwise get on with your life and enjoy it knowing that you have cost parking lie money.

SevenTowers

Jo,
As per everyone else's comments just ignore every demand you receive for payment, nobody in N. Ireland has ever had a parking charge taken to court, so join the tens of thousands of us in NI who are blissfully ignoring parking companies ridiculous demands for payments.

Castle

fisherjim wrote: »

The appellant has advised that PoFA 2012 does not apply to registered keepers in Northern Ireland. However, the contravention happened in Wales and I am satisfied the operator can transfer liability to the keeper.

Really? Good luck with that one then Parking Lie!

The car park was in Wales so they can transfer liability, but any court case will have to be held in Northern Ireland. The problem for parking lie is that no Northern Ireland court has the authority to hear the case.

happybagger

I shall follow this with interst and see what automated stuff comes out.
This is the same store as my PCN with incorrect timestamping.

I don't know how long this store will persist with ParkingEye, there is a council multistorey car park on the adjacent plot just 10 yards from their building which is completely free and has been since 2 Jan 2015.

Umkomaas

there is a council multistorey car park on the adjacent plot just 10 yards from their building which is completely free and has been since 2 Jan 2015.

Which means shoppers have to carry their bags a further 10 yards. Won't happen!