Ticket machine produced a "spurious" ticket ?

infinite_improbability

PoFA Paragraph 4,5,6,11 and 12 (the terms to which the PPC is allowed to pursue the keeper) all refer to "unpaid parking charges" - I can prove that the original £4 parking charge was paid - So does that mean they can't use PoFA to find the registered keeper ?

Umkomaas

So does that mean they can't use PoFA to find the registered keeper ?

They will try anything and everything, legit or otherwise, to get their hands on your money. You will have to fight them on every point they put forward - ultimately it would be for a judge to decide. It's unlikely you'd get anything sensible in the context of PoFA from the IAS.

infinite_improbability

If a PPC say that the ticket you have displayed is invalid - yet that ticket was paid for and produced by the machine. showing correct time date and fee - Is there an argument that says there is no signage to show what a valid ticket should look like therefore you have no way of checking ? Also - signage - A car park that is a large field only has a sign at the entrance and a sign at the machine. Is this sufficient ?

infinite_improbability

Umkomaas wrote: »

Yep, probably, but they are pursuing you at the moment. You could in return pursue them.

Just collating arguments to use in court. Wanted to know if anyone has had the same problem. There's no cases on these forums that I can fine similar

Umkomaas

Is there an argument that says there is no signage to show what a valid ticket should look like therefore you have no way of checking ? Also - signage - A car park that is a large field only has a sign at the entrance and a sign at the machine. Is this sufficient ?

If you're preparing for the possibility of relying on these, then you need plenty of photos to back you up.

infinite_improbability

Umkomaas wrote: »

If you're preparing for the possibility of relying on these, then you need plenty of photos to back you up.

my argument is :-
The full fee was paid
The ticket was dispensed
That ticket showed the time , date and amount clearly
That ticket was displayed on the dashboard as required in the T's and C's
The ticket covered the time of parking
There is no way the driver could know if it was a valid ticket or not and even if they suspected it was not , their choices would only be - pay the fee again with no guarantee of getting a different ticket, leave the carpark and lose the money or display the ticket on the windscreen as instructed on the ticket and in the T's and C's .
The only contact number on the sign is a premium rate number and that would mean effectively paying again
The owners of the carpark / parking company have a responsibility to produce a valid ticket on receipt of the correct fee
I'm sure a Judge would agree

infinite_improbability

infinite_improbability wrote: »

there is a vat number on the PCN

yes its on the PCN

infinite_improbability

Umkomaas wrote: »

If you're preparing for the possibility of relying on these, then you need plenty of photos to back you up.

There are only 2 signs in the whole car park - one on the entrance and one by the ticket machine

Umkomaas

infinite_improbability wrote: »

There are only 2 signs in the whole car park - one on the entrance and one by the ticket machine

Photograph them then!

my argument is :-
The full fee was paid
The ticket was dispensed
That ticket showed the time , date and amount clearly
That ticket was displayed on the dashboard as required in the T's and C's
The ticket covered the time of parking
There is no way the driver could know if it was a valid ticket or not and even if they suspected it was not , their choices would only be - pay the fee again with no guarantee of getting a different ticket, leave the carpark and lose the money or display the ticket on the windscreen as instructed on the ticket and in the T's and C's .
The only contact number on the sign is a premium rate number and that would mean effectively paying again
The owners of the carpark / parking company have a responsibility to produce a valid ticket on receipt of the correct fee
I'm sure a Judge would agree

Well that's OK then!

You do know that the small claims court is known to be very much a lottery, I suppose?

infinite_improbability

Umkomaas wrote: »

Photograph them then!


Well that's OK then!

You do know that the small claims court is known to be very much a lottery, I suppose?

.... so your recommendation would be ?