Car parking grace period

iamarealjediknight

Hello

I have looked at the 'Newbies' section about the issue of parking charges, however, I was wondering if additional advice could be provided about the matters below.

My wife recently parked in the same car park (Weymouth Old Town East) and received a PCN yesterday (30/8) and it was issued on 24/8 - this allows only 7 days in which to make the so-called discounted payment of £60. I guess that if an appeal is lodged then she will lose the right to a discounted payment.

That aside, my wife keeps all of her parking tickets so she has the one for the date in question.

The PCN states that she entered the car park at 16:04:22 hrs and left the car park at 17:15:35 hrs. Her ticket show that she paid £1.20 for one hours parking at 16:07 meaning that she would have to leave the parking bay by 17:07. She was no more than 5 minutes late in driving out of the parking bay (she had to take our 4 year old daughter to the toilet.

Clearly (and it is not disputed) that she exited the car park site at 17:15 hrs. This therefore means that she had remained on the car parking site only seven minutes beyond the period for which she paid.

It is my understanding that the Government introduced legislation requiring private car parking companies (as well as councils etc) to give 10 minutes grace with regard to overstaying the paid for period - is this correct?

If yes, then on this basis, the parking charge issued in this case is not valid.

Am I right presume that Parking Eye are entirely inaccurate in implying that my wife overstayed by 11 minutes - yes, she DROVE IN at 16:04 and DEPARTED at 17:15 , but surely one only pays for the period during which one is stationary in a parking bay - is this not when the contract between the driver and the car parking company begins and does it not end when the driver leaves the parking bay? Using the times provided by on the PCN and comparing them with the time at which she paid on the ticket, she left the car park 1 hour and seven minutes after she paid for the i hour ticket - within the stipulated grace period.

One could be driving around a car park for several minutes waiting for a space to become available (especially in a seaside town like weymouth in the summer) - do these companies expect us to pay for the time driving around their car parks too! (sorry to rant). It would be a bit like issuing a parking ticket to someone for 'driving' or even in stationary traffic along a road with double yellow lines...

Any advice gratefully received

pappa_golf

10 mins grace on entering the car park , 10 mins (plus) grace to leave the site
the PE cameras recorded when you passed the entrance , not when you paid and set off


end of parking period 17:07 add 10 mins to leave site = 17.17 , you left the site at 17.15


if they don,t like it , tell them to read the BPA code of practice again


13 Grace periods
13.1 Your approach to parking management must allow a
driver who enters your car park but decides not to park,
to leave the car park within a reasonable period without
having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.
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.
13.3 You should be prepared to tell us the specific grace period
at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is.
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 actio

Castle

iamarealjediknight wrote: »

It is my understanding that the Government introduced legislation requiring private car parking companies (as well as councils etc) to give 10 minutes grace with regard to overstaying the paid for period - is this correct?

Not quite:-Only councils must provide a minimum of 10 minutes by law; however, all members of the BPA should provide a 10 minute grace period to leave under their Code of Practice.

The_Slithy_Tove

This is ParkingEye, right (or has it changed)? If so, then the BPA code of practice applies, and PE know full well (from their court loss regarding Fistral Beach (before they got thrown out) that sufficient time must be given to leave).

When appealing, DO NOT talk about why the driver was late leaving. Just use the standard appeal text in the NEWBIES thread, adding a piece about the Code of Practice and Grace Periods.

[ParkingEye also know from their Beavis case, that they cannot charge a ridiculous parking charge for overstays in a Pay & Display (or equivalent pay/hour type) car park. The Court of Appeal told them that. They may need reminding of that fact if/when it gets to POPLA.]

Stonedhouse

Hi -I saw you originally posted this in my thread covering the same car park - no worries at all about that but Umkomaas's advice to start a new thread was with your best interests in mind.

Just to let you know I complained directly to Weymouth Council as a quick google about this specific site (operated by Parking Eye) has caused over 700 complaints to them. I too sent a strong complaint to Weymouth / Dorset Council advising my family was now blacklisting Weymouth (we visit there numerous times a year).

They replied back saying.... "I should like to stress that I cannot disagree with the sentiments of your emails, however there is unfortunately nothing that this Council is able to do to in order to influence the charges made and / or the level of parking fines issued by Parking Eye......" and went on to advise other routes of complaint (BPA etc).

I'm sure if they were aggrieved as much as all the public that had fallen foul of this then they could do something but hey ho !

For what it is worth you might want to add your complaint to the growing pile by contacting -

Jack Creeber
Interim Parking & Transport Manager
Dorset Councils Partnership serving:
North Dorset District Council, West Dorset District Council and Weymouth & Portland Borough Council
Council Offices, North Quay, Weymouth, Dorset, DT4 8TA
email jcreeber@dorset.gov.uk

Best of luck with your appeal.

iamarealjediknight

I did attempt to complain to Weymouth Council this morning but they informed me that the car parking site is owned by Brewers Quay. Weymouth Council are correct in saying that they cant do anything because it is a private car park but Brewers Quay can because they own it and it is in their best interest to ensure that Weymouth (and specifically Brewers Quay) is not blacklisted by potential visitors like yourself.

I then contacted a Mr Roger Dalton (associated with the consortium who own Brewers Quay) he was concerned about reputation damage and the potential impact upon their business arising from disgruntled car park users. He has asked me to email him with details of my concerns so that he can escalate. Hopefully, this will result in pointed discussions with ParkingEye with regard to the terms of their contractual agreement ensuring a fairer and more reasonable approach to the management of this car park. It is worth noting that he was very very concerned about the potential impact upon their business.

Mr Dalton's email address is hello@rogerdaltonassociates.co.uk - I guess that the more people who email him about their experience, the more likely things are to change for the better.

I have been looking at the case law aspects and the Beavis case has been mentioned a lot (this site included).

However, in the event the car park is pay and display (as opposed to free - ref the Beavis case), a stronger case is ParkingEye v Cargius. (25 November 2014, Wrexham County Court). DDJ Mahy dismissed ParkingEye's claim, The charge of £100 far exceeded the cost of the overstay (£2) and subsequent costs. Commercial justification did not apply (whereas it did in the Beavis judgment) because the car park generated substantial revenue and therefore it was not necessary to charge large amounts for transgressions to make management commercially viable.

I just feel that it is important to make the distinction here if case law is going to be cited as a defence.

ezerscrooge

Weymouth Council may well be able to do something if PE do not have advertising consent for their signs and planning permission for pole mounted ANPR cameras.

Could be worth making an enquiry to Weymouth Council Planning Department. If the council have pair, then they could refuse permission (advertising consent cannot be retrospective) and tell PE to take the signs and cameras down.

That'll show how much the council agree with people's sentiments.

Ivor_Pecheque

Have a look at CS018, the Judge said som'at about grace periods in our case http://www.parking-prankster.com/case-law.html

Coupon-mad

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

When appealing, DO NOT talk about why the driver was late leaving. Just use the standard appeal text in the NEWBIES thread, adding a piece about the Code of Practice and Grace Periods.

I agree, just add something about the BPA Grace periods to the standard blue text NEWBIES thread appeal.

The times you have mentioned:

The PCN states that she entered the car park at 16:04:22 hrs and left the car park at 17:15:35 hrs. Her ticket show that she paid £1.20 for one hours parking at 16:07 meaning that she would have to leave the parking bay by 17:07. She was no more than 5 minutes late in driving out of the parking bay (she had to take our 4 year old daughter to the toilet.

Clearly (and it is not disputed) that she exited the car park site at 17:15 hrs. This therefore means that she had remained on the car parking site only seven minutes beyond the period for which she paid.

...as you can see, as 100% within allowed grace periods and this is a scandal. You should also email the BPA and complain about PE ignoring and breaching the CoP on Grace Periods:

aos@britishparking.co.uk

copy in PE:

info@parkingeye.co.uk

The only other explanation could be that PE are saying there is no record AT ALL of the 1 hour payment made*, and that can be due to a typo in the VRN (could be caused by a faulty keypad, not necessarily the fault of the consumer). A complaint to the BPA might help flush this out, otherwise at POPLA stage, you do not know whether you are arguing that grace periods should have been allowed, or that the keypad was faulty or the keys too faded to be fit for purpose to clearly input a VRN (no fault of the driver). A typo in the VRN would only be minor and should result in a cancelled PCN but you never know with PPCs. And the BPA cannot force a member to cancel.

DO NOT name the driver if PE ask, or in the appeal. Choose 'registered keeper' on their appeal webpage and also be careful only to complain as 'keeper' when you complain to the BPA about this apparent breach.




* you cannot tell either way from their standard PCN wording because we know it says 'either/or' which leaves you thinking it's about the grace period when in fact it might be they can't see a payment at all for that car reg. You have to demand the answer from the BPA or them, so you can make an informed decision. PE themselves certainly know whether it's 'wrong VRN' or not and they are required to do checks to make sure it is appropriate to issue a PCN - e.g. they *should* have checked for similar VRNs, to find and match any payments missed by their system.

Redx

if it is a typo in the VRM then their much vaunted "99" checks done before a pcn is issued isnt working , lol

the system should be foolproof and not even allow a VRM to be input that isnt recorded by the cameras , but then thats being cynical or foolish to think they dont want mistakes being made

if it is an overstay CoP breach , report it, because they seem to be doing this a lot recently despite court rulings about it

Coupon-mad

I hate the way PE's PCNs are worded so people think they are arguing about one thing (grace period not properly applied) then at POPLA stage, PE spring it on the consumer that they 'have no record of payment at all for that VRN'. So the poor appellant has almost no chance of turning the appeal around by then, having not argued that in the first place (and POPLA will not allow new evidence...).