Parking With Ease charge - advice needed!

Castle

Fredolow wrote: »

Neither specifically mention signs and cameras, but I'm not sure if planning permission is required for them on private land (?)

If the signs can be seen from the public highway then advertising consent is needed, (depending on the size of the signs). As for the cameras then permission will be needed.

Northlakes

This thread has some photos.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5328093

fidav

Good luck...plenty of good advice on this forum and also on pepipoo and consumer action group, where you may find my own ongoing issue.

Fredolow

Thanks again for the additional advice. I've sent another email to LE this morning based on some of the feedback here. I'll keep you guys posted of any update.

Fredolow

Nothing as yet back from LE, but that's no real surprise given that the tone of my last email changed and highlighted their accountability. I now need to decide whether to appeal or cave into these thieves. I have a couple of follow on questions I'm hoping someone an help me with which will help aid my decision:

1) The NTK states that payment within 14 days offers a reduced charge of £30. After 14 days that jumps up to £50. If I appeal within the 14 days will that freeze it at £30 or will it still go to £50 as soon as 14 days pass?

2) If I decide to fight this all the way and eventually lose to these thieves, what is the most I can expect to pay given that they are likely to shovel on as many additional fees as possible at ever opportunity? I appreciate this may be an approximation, but a ballpark figure would be most helpful.

I continue to read up on as much detail of cases like this as my schedule allows. The help you guys have given thus far is very much appreciated. Thank you!

Coupon-mad

Fredolow wrote: »

Nothing as yet back from LE, but that's no real surprise given that the tone of my last email changed and highlighted their accountability. I now need to decide whether to appeal or cave into these thieves.

Or the 3rd option that we suggest - SIT TIGHT and wait & see if a claim eventually arrives - and defend that.

1) The NTK states that payment within 14 days offers a reduced charge of £30. After 14 days that jumps up to £50. If I appeal within the 14 days will that freeze it at £30 or will it still go to £50 as soon as 14 days pass?

Who knows and who cares? We never tell people to think about the so-called discount (a bribe not to appeal). But the answer really is, ''who knows?'' because this industry make it all up as they go along:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/is-it-pcm-uk-who-make-up-stuff-all-time.html

2) If I decide to fight this all the way and eventually lose to these thieves, what is the most I can expect to pay given that they are likely to shovel on as many additional fees as possible at every opportunity? I appreciate this may be an approximation, but a ballpark figure would be most helpful.

A registered keeper is only potentially liable for the full parking charge as shown on any POFA compliant Notice to Keeper. £50. Plus court fees which, if it goes to a hearing, could be £75 on top, so not a huge risk at all. That's why you see so many court claims on here being defended because:

(a) it's not a huge risk of paying more because the small claims track is not one for recovering huge solicitor's costs and

(b) you could certainly have a chance to win v Gladstones!

Fredolow

Okay, so the 2nd letter arrived today with the now revised charge of £50 and a statement that payment must be made within 14 days. No surprise, but just so I'm clear is the best course to ignore this as well and wait to see if legal action follows? Also, given that this all came about because their 'intelligent' number plate recognition system didn't record my plate on entry and therefore couldn't give me an entry time, is it worth me asking for photographic proof, as the keeper, of entry and exit times? All they've shown me so far is a bit of paper with indicated times.

Thanks for any help/guidance you can offer.

Fredolow

UPDATE: (because I presume there may be some who are interested in how this is progressing)

I sent an appeal in using the template letter from the Newbies parking ticket thread and adjusted it slightly to my situation. I asked them for:

A copy of their contract with the landholder that demonstrates that they have their authority.
Whether their charge is based on damages for breach of contract along with justification for the sum.
Whether their charge is based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking along with justification for the sum.
A copy of the signs that they can evidence were on the site at the time of the alleged infraction as well as all photographs taken of the vehicle that clearly show timestamped entry and exit times into/from the site.
As the site works on a number plate recognition system, documented evidence that this system was functioning properly at the alleged time of the infraction and that the system was able to inform the driver of how much was due when they exited based on the captured entry time.

I also informed them that they had failed to transfer liability to the keeper as their NTK was too late to meet the requirements of POFA 2012, which it was. That they would therefore need to take it up with the driver and not the keeper.

Their response was:

"The site contains clear signage both at the entrance and throughout the park including on the over flow car park area. In addition there are also payment machines within the park for payment to be made or the option to make payment via our website upto 48 hrs after visit. As no paymentwas made by any method or any contact made to notify us of your issue we cannot accept your appeal"

Also that if I believe this decision is incorrect I should lodge a further appeal to the IAS.

So, that's where I'm up to. As they have failed on every count to supply the information I requested and have sent me what looks like a pre-prepped reply, can someone advise me whether I should go back and further demand what I originally requested? Also, as they were outside of the requirements POFA 2012 with their original NTK do they have a leg to stand on?

I appreciate my last request for help went unheeded and I therefore took it upon myself as to the best course of action (using the Newbies thread as guidance), but the next stage in that thread discusses POPLA and not to bother with IAS.

Thanks in advance!

Carthesis

Fredolow wrote: »

I also informed them that they had failed to transfer liability to the keeper as their NTK was too late to meet the requirements of POFA 2012, which it was. That they would therefore need to take it up with the driver and not the keeper.

Did they simply not make any mention of this? Have they just ignored the fact that, in order to pursue Keeper Liability, they need to strictly conform with POFA2012 and not their bent-as-a-banana interpretation of it?

I know why people don't recommend the IAS appeal, but if you're sure (SURE!) about the dates all stacking up, then I don't see the harm in presenting the case to IAS with that as the sole appeal point. It does you no harm if you lose as it isn't binding on you, and if they do ever bother trying to take you to court and brandish the IAS "win" as "proof", then you can simply point out that it doesn't comply with POFA and wait for them to squirm in front of a judge.

**EDIT**

By going to IAS they will also be forced to present their evidence in the form of photographs, which is something else they seem to have ignored. If they don't present it, then they have no case.

Umkomaas

Are they pursuing keeper liability under PoFA? What does their NtK say about this?

As Carthesis says, they switch-and-swap interpretations to suit themselves. Ultimately, IPC members, when pressed, state they are not pursuing under PoFA, rather they are working on the 'reasonable presumption' that the keeper was the driver on the day, justifying this with Elliott -v- Loake tosh.