Athena / Lidl Parking Charge 2017

MadWal

Hi All,

New member here - read the NEWBIE thread and tried to glean as much information as possible so as to avoid asking questions that are already answered and avoid wasting anybody's time! However, the situation is just slightly different and wonder if the variances in the story may create a worse outlook for the appeal.

As you can gather by the thread title, looking for help on contesting a parking ticket. The Registered Keeper of the car received a Civil Parking Charge Notice from Athena ANPR Ltd, issue date end of last week. The driver was not the registered keeper.

Context below:
The car was parked in a Lidl’s opposite a big block of flats. Historically, it has been common practice for visitors of the block of flats to use the car park at Lidl’s. In fact, even people who LIVE IN the block of flats have parked there nightly, as the flats only have one allotted car park space.

Anyway, as normal, the car was parked in the Lidl's car park the one evening last week. The store is open until 9pm, is quite well signposted and displays that it has a free parking limit of 90 minutes. The civil charge notice shows images of the car arriving at around 18:30 and leaving over 4 hours later at around 22:30. It seems that the ANPR camera's have been installed very recently.

This is the primary concern in appealing - that 4 hours is not a logical / reasonable length of time to be shopping, and given the shop closed 2.5 hours after the car was initially parked there, there would be no good reason to still be parked there for another 1.5 hours after Lidl closed. Seems logical that this rules out the "complaining to Lidl CEO" approach that many threads on here give merit to.

The car park was not very busy at all when the car was parked.. Would Lidl struggle to demonstrate a genuine pre-estimate of loss given the driver did not obstruct others from parking and also that the business closed during the stay (the driver can't cause a business to lose money if the business isn’t open!!!). Also, would it be difficult for them to claim lost revenue for a free car park as: there is no mechanism to pay for extra time; there is no way of quantifying lost revenue anyway AND creating the Civil Parking Charge Notice does not constitute an expense that can be recoverable?

Of course as it's a £90 ‘charge', what is the position on them proving that that figure is 'reasonable' and 'not exceeding disproportionate amount’?

Summary questions:

1) Other than the fact it is a dressed up invoice from a PPC, are there reasonable grounds to appeal given the driver was not a Lidl patron and that the overstay was not 10 or so minutes but 2.5 hours?

2) If there are reasonable grounds, what grounds should be appealed on? Should the full template on the NEWBIE thread for IPC-backed PPC’s be used? (unsure as some aspects don’t really apply e.g. appealing the amount of signage given it is well sign-posted - unless you guys think including this is a part of the course to a well rounded appeal).

3) Can the case of the other people who live in the block of flats and have used the car park daily without being penalised be used against Athena for showing an inconsistent approach to issuing their charges (without identifying the tenants of course)?
4) Given that the appeals process for Athena is through IPC, which has been slated on here for being a dodgy and PPC-favoring appeals process, would the case not be quickly rejected by them - handing an advantage to Athena in pursuing the claim?

Apologies if there are any areas covered in another thread - there are so many out there it was impossible to find one with matching circumstances (i.e. overrunning by so much and the driver not being a Lidl customer!).

Many thanks in advance for your help! Please do let me know if there's any other info that would help you to understand :j

Cheers,

A

Coupon-mad

Would Lidl struggle to demonstrate a genuine pre-estimate of loss

This would not be Lidl's claim, if taken to small claims it would be Athena. And they don't have to show any loss or GPEOL (read the ParkingEye v Beavis decision from Nov2015 in the supreme Court). So forget that.

Of course as it's a £90 ‘charge', what is the position on them proving that that figure is 'reasonable' and 'not exceeding disproportionate amount’?

Same as above, the Beavis case was £85 and so they have no such hoop to jump through. £90 would be considered OK.

If there are reasonable grounds, what grounds should be appealed on? Should the full template on the NEWBIE thread for IPC-backed PPC’s be used? (unsure as some aspects don’t really apply e.g. appealing the amount of signage given it is well sign-posted - unless you guys think including this is a part of the course to a well rounded appeal).

Yes, all of it. Don't forget it was dark, signs must be illuminated or very prominent with large font terms, readable in ambient lighting.

Can the case of the other people who live in the block of flats and have used the car park daily without being penalised be used against Athena for showing an inconsistent approach to issuing their charges

No. I would go as far as saying it's people who park like that who actually cause the pariah of PPCs. That is rogue parking; don't do it.

Given that the appeals process for Athena is through IPC, which has been slated on here for being a dodgy and PPC-favoring appeals process, would the case not be quickly rejected by them - handing an advantage to Athena in pursuing the claim?

You only hand Athena an 'advantage' if you try IAS. But we say do NOT try IAS, only do the first challenge, to look reasonable and robust and to make it clear you are not ignoring it and that you are taking forum advice. It's merely a statement of intent, showing yourself not to be an ignorer.

Then you ignore them. Look how likely the chances are of a court claim:

http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Athena_ANPR.html

Tedious debt collector letters beckon:

https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/203568802-Athena-ANPR-Ltd

Enjoy ignoring those!

MadWal

Thanks for getting back to me with such a comprehensive reply!

So to clarify there should be a complaint to Athena through their own appeals process using the ENTIRE template you guys have on the other thread? And when they (inevitably) reject the appeal, THEN the ignoring can commence and no further action needs to be taken.

Even with the info provided showing that historically they haven't taken a single case to court - the concern still lies within the length of time the car was parked there by the driver... Would Athena not look at that and see the case as a nailed on victory for them and pursue?

Probably overthinking it! From what can be seen on other threads it's not worth their time and potentially hundreds of pounds to recover a £90 charge - is that right?

Thanks again,

A

Quentin

MadWal wrote: »

....So to clarify there should be a complaint to Athena through their own appeals process using the ENTIRE template you guys have on the other thread? And when they (inevitably) reject the appeal, THEN the ignoring can commence and no further action needs to be taken......

Yes


Except...you ignore everything EXCEPT any court action.


They have 6 years to commence legal proceedings and should they do so then come back for help and advice about your defence at that time

Coupon-mad

Even with the info provided showing that historically they haven't taken a single case to court - the concern still lies within the length of time the car was parked there by the driver... Would Athena not look at that and see the case as a nailed on victory for them and pursue?

Highly unlikely for a firm with no court history. If they were to try one in court in future, to dip their toes into the process, it would more likely be a repeat 'offender' with 5 or 6 PCNs taking the sum up to 4 figures with escalated added (made-up) costs. That's worth throwing an MCOL fee at; yours is not, almost certainly, ever going to be singled out.

MadWal

Hey guys,

Thanks for your feedback so far. I had a good look through the Newbies thread for the correct template, which in parts was referenced as 'Post #3'. However the only part that mentions it says 'see separate post #3 below' and then there's a big gap!

I think it is as follows - would you be able to confirm this is the best template to appeal to Athena directly?

"Dear {name of IPC member - only IPC members for this version!!!}

Re PCN number:

I am the keeper of the vehicle and am aware of your purported 'parking charge'. The driver will not be identified. I require the following information so that I can make an informed decision:

1. Who is the party that contracted with your company?
2. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
3. Please provide photos of the signs that you say were on site and which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
4. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle.
5. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera used was synchronised with all other cameras and/or systems & machines.

Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs which would be a thinly-veiled attempt at 'double recovery'. I will not respond to debt collectors and to involve a third party would be a failure to mitigate your costs as well as deliberate and knowing misuse of my data.

Should you obtain the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause (e.g. if you do not fully comply with the IPC Code of Practice in terms of signage at this site, for example) please take this as formal notice that I reserve the right to sue your company and the landowner/principal, for a sum not less than £250 for any Data Protection Act breach.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle, whether you have already obtained it or not. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days.

Yours faithfully,

It wasn't specifically called Post #3 so I just wanted to be sure this is the most up-to-date template.

Thanks,

A

Quentin

That is the template letter set out in #3 of the newbies faq thread!

Oligopoly90

Hi, I got one of these letters today ��I'm a little confused and worried what to do! (Read loads of forums but still confussed) I parked in lidl not realising it had a time limit and met up with a friend for coffee. I don't have any proof of purchase in the shop. What's best thing to do? It's athena again.

Quentin

You need to start your own thread. (But read up the newbies faq thread near the top of the forum first for advice on what to do and when to do it)

anrella

MadWal wrote: »

Hey guys,

Thanks for your feedback so far. I had a good look through the Newbies thread for the correct template, which in parts was referenced as 'Post #3'. However the only part that mentions it says 'see separate post #3 below' and then there's a big gap!

I think it is as follows - would you be able to confirm this is the best template to appeal to Athena directly?

"Dear {name of IPC member - only IPC members for this version!!!}

Re PCN number:

I am the keeper of the vehicle and am aware of your purported 'parking charge'. The driver will not be identified. I require the following information so that I can make an informed decision:

1. Who is the party that contracted with your company?
2. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
3. Please provide photos of the signs that you say were on site and which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
4. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle.
5. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera used was synchronised with all other cameras and/or systems & machines.

Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs which would be a thinly-veiled attempt at 'double recovery'. I will not respond to debt collectors and to involve a third party would be a failure to mitigate your costs as well as deliberate and knowing misuse of my data.

Should you obtain the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause (e.g. if you do not fully comply with the IPC Code of Practice in terms of signage at this site, for example) please take this as formal notice that I reserve the right to sue your company and the landowner/principal, for a sum not less than £250 for any Data Protection Act breach.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle, whether you have already obtained it or not. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days.

Yours faithfully,

It wasn't specifically called Post #3 so I just wanted to be sure this is the most up-to-date template.

Thanks,

A

I did this. How did you get on ignoring them after sending the template letter? Have they stopped harassing you?

Coupon-mad

They don't just stop! You get daft 'demand' letters. Everyone has ignored debt letters for a decade on here, it's nothing:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5035663

And if these firms try a small claim, that ends it, and we win pretty much every time as these cases ARE defendable.