Cheeky trap - NPS

Guys_Dad

And you know the ID of the "parking woman" and can prove (with photographs?) that she was not only parked there but actually saw you park whilst at the same time visually checking from her seat that you didn't have a permit?

Knowing that she was in a position to mitigate damages and being able to prove it are vastly different things.

Just trying to be realistic for you.

Quentin

The_Deep wrote: »

Yes I know. In my opinion it is wrong,.......

Can't you see how confusing it is for you to post opposing advice to the standard forum advice?


If you want to post your opposing "advice" it would help newbies if you made it clear that you are merely posting your opinion and that it is at variance with the FAQ which is the accepted authority here!!

TiguanDriver1

I've written the below which I plan to send to the business that I believe the permit only spaces belong to - any feedback gratefully received!


I am writing with reference to the above car park, which has a number of spaces listed as reserved for ‘XXXXXX’. Does this refer to your business and are those spaces your property?

On Sunday 8 January at 2:46pm my vehicle was parked in the car park opposite your business. On entry to the car park there was a sign that said this was a Pay & Display car park, so the driver was under the impression that any spaces they parked in were pay and display spaces. There was an NPS car parking enforcement person in the car park ticketing vehicles at the time, so the driver was careful to ensure a ticket was purchased. The driver parked in a space immediately next to a space that the NPS officer’s van was parked in (this carried the NPS logos), got out of the car and bought a ticket for two hours before returning to the car, putting the ticket on the dashboard and heading off to their appointment. The parking enforcement person will have seen the driver go through all these motions.

On returning to the vehicle an hour and a half later the driver noticed a parking charge notice had been left attached to the vehicle, issued only 4 minutes after the ticket to the car park was purchased. After closer inspection of the small print on some of the signs, the driver noticed that the car was parked in a 'permit only bay' – one with yellow lines instead of white ones. This is the type of bay that both my car and the NPS employee's van were parked in and may belong to your business. If this is the case then the driver and I are sincerely sorry that my vehicle was parked in your space and hope that it did not cause any inconvenience to your business last Sunday.

The parking charge notice that was attached to the vehicle says 'The vehicle was parked on private property in a manner where the driver agreed to pay a parking charge as displayed on the signage at the site' - a parking charge was paid for at the site, and the ticket clearly displayed on the dashboard. I have a copy of this ticket should you wish to see it.

Having visited the site myself, I don't think the signage is particularly clear that those bays are for permit holders only - the signs on display look very similar to those in the pay and display bays and without close inspection could easily be mistaken for the same sign. In this case a ticket was bought from the machine in good faith by the driver thinking that was the right course of action, only to be caught out by the ‘small print’.

Moreover the NPS employee watched as my vehicle was parked there, and a ticket was paid for to park in that spot – I feel that it is entirely unethical (and even legally questionable) that an employee of NPS would fail to intervene when she knew an honest mistake was being made only to enforce a parking charge notice only 4 minutes later.

Unfortunately I feel like NPS has deliberately set out to trap people in this way.

The parking charge notice asks for £100 to be paid to NPS, or £60 if paid within 14 days, which I feel to be a disproportionately high amount for parking in this space, particularly as a parking ticket was paid for by the driver.

I hope that you agree that the driver made an honest mistake last Sunday which was as a result of:

• poor signage in the car park with permit requirements that were difficult to identify, and
• the deliberate inaction of an NPS employee who could have intervened to prevent the car from being parked in your space, and therefore could have prevented an inconvenience to your business.

Please also note that the NPS van was also parked in a bay reserved for permit holders at the same time as the driver parked in the car park, which would have also been a deliberate inconvenience to your business.

In light of this, I would be extremely grateful if you could speak to NPS and ask them to cancel the parking charge notice issued to my vehicle:

Reference number: XXXXXXXXX
Vehicle registration: XXXXXXXX

I’m very sorry for any inconvenience this causes you and thank you for your help in this matter.

The_Deep

Can't you see how confusing it is for you to post opposing advice to the standard forum advice?

No, please elucidate.

If you want to post your opposing "advice" it would help newbies if you made it clear that you are merely posting your opinion

But is not most of the advice on here opinion?

and that it is at variance with the FAQ which is the accepted authority here!!

Accepted by whom, certainly not me. A lot of the advice on here is, in my opinion, overegged, too many Is dotted, two many Ts crossed.

By giving opinions different from those of CM, I am encouraging posters to think outside the box. I have advised Ministers of the Crown, and a prime minister, I do know what I am doing.

paulstevens64

I have advised Pinky and Perky, and two of the Teletubbies!


Does this mean that I am entitled to hold a different opinion to CM as well?

The_Deep

I suspect Sir that that is not the case, I however am not telling lies.

TiguanDriver1

Hi everyone


As much as I'm interested in your arguments and I'm sure you've given great advice to forum posters in the past, nobody has actually really given me any help here...

I've now sent the letter to who I think is the landowner so hopefully I'll get a positive response.


Umkomaas, I've spoken to the leasing company and asked them to ignore any notice to keeper from them - thank you. I think next Wednesday is day 18 so if I haven't heard back from the landowner by then I'll start an appeal.

twhitehousescat

TiguanDriver1 wrote: »

Hi everyone


As much as I'm interested in your arguments and I'm sure you've given great advice to forum posters in the past, nobody has actually really given me any help here...

I've now sent the letter to who I think is the landowner so hopefully I'll get a positive response.


Umkomaas, I've spoken to the leasing company and asked them to ignore any notice to keeper from them - thank you. I think next Wednesday is day 18 so if I haven't heard back from the landowner by then I'll start an appeal.

wrong! if they receive paperwork they have to act on it

your post above , you say you are writing to the landowner?

you need to steer the PARKING co away from applying to the DVLA for info

DoaM

Wrong. OP has already advised the leasing company that it is being actioned ... assuming this means the OP is appealing to NPS (as keeper) in the necessary timescale. As such the leasing company shouldn't receive an NTK anyway.

If NPS subsequently request keeper data from DVLA then they've done so without reasonable cause as the windscreen notice has received a response.

Quentin

TiguanDriver1 wrote: »

.... nobody has actually really given me any help here...

You have been comprehensively advised in #5! (There's not a lot you can do when dealing with an IPC ppc except wait and see if they try court action and complain to the landowner to get them to cancel the ticket)