LBCCC from PE - at Tesco store

parcaal

Yeah, this is what I thought. PE mentioned specifically in their defense that the allow 10 min minimum Grace period, so taking this into account my overstay is c.40 seconds.

I have read the forum - the plan is to ignore all letters until they decide to sue (if at all). I will see if I can get Tesco involved and cancel it that way - it will only show pro-activity.

Will keep you posted as I progress.

Umkomaas

Did you not provide PE with evidence of you being a customer on the day via a copy of receipts/bank/cc statement as advised?

beamerguy

parcaal wrote: »

Yeah, this is what I thought. PE mentioned specifically in their defense that the allow 10 min minimum Grace period, so taking this into account my overstay is c.40 seconds.

I have read the forum - the plan is to ignore all letters until they decide to sue (if at all). I will see if I can get Tesco involved and cancel it that way - it will only show pro-activity.

Will keep you posted as I progress.

Around 40 secs over ????? rather confirms that the POPLA
accessor needs to be trained properly, unless of course
there is another motive ???

Dave Lewis is the CEO of Tesco, although he will not reply
and leaves to his so called customer service who are ok
but NOT customer friendly.
All this while Lewis is probably sitting on the loo

2018 will be a new year for customer haters

parcaal

beamerguy wrote: »

Around 40 secs over ????? rather confirms that the POPLA
accessor needs to be trained properly, unless of course
there is another motive ???

Dave Lewis is the CEO of Tesco, although he will not reply
and leaves to his so called customer service who are ok
but NOT customer friendly.
All this while Lewis is probably sitting on the loo

2018 will be a new year for customer haters

Since my last post I haven't got the chance to focus on responding on his to Tesco. I will respond this weekend as I don't have time to wait anymore.

Umkomaas wrote: »

Did you not provide PE with evidence of you being a customer on the day via a copy of receipts/bank/cc statement as advised?

I have provided them in the initial internal PE assessment. They have also attached it to the POPLA appeal. It is just getting very frustrating, it has been nearly 9 months since the event.


I have received their LBCCC and they want me to respond asap before they take me to court.

I am in two minds whether to keep disputing it with them and send them a letter that I still disagree with the POPLA decision.

I still plan to respond with my main points being:
- dispute still the debt;
- have been customer of the retail shop at the car park, hence I had valid reason to be parking there (i.e. it wasn't just parking randomly) and I will reattach a copy of my bank statement
- if they take me to MCOL, my main defence point will be that I have overstayed 40s = 20 min allowed +10 grace period +40s. Plus, they haven't been specific how long is the grace period and their minimum one is 10 min, so overstay of 40s is abs ridiculous basis to be used for enforcing a breach

It is probably because I am coming from my accountant background, but I still find their penalty disproportionate for the amount of overstay. I recognise Beavis, but I have overstayed 40s for £100, which is essentially paying them £2.50 every second, or they charge minimum hourly wage for every 3 seconds. I know the legal system doesn't work like this, but this is absolute madness. If they invoiced me on a timely basis, I might have paid...

I will share the letter in a bit as well.

parcaal

Hi all, I have drafted my response to the second LBCCC - utilised a mix of my first LBCCC challenge and the POPLA appeal.

Think I am relatively happy with this response, but am happy to take on board any points:

Dear ParkingEye Legal Department,

Re - your Letter Before County Court Claim re PCN: XXXX/XXXX

This is a formal response to your 'Letter before County Court Action' dated XX XXXXX 2018 as the keeper of the vehicle in question. The driver's identity will not be supplied to you. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were. As the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver.

I disagree with the POPLA decision (ref. XXXXX) and still dispute the validity of the “parking charge”.

Minimum Grace Periods

Your evidence submitted to POPLA didn’t confirm what are the minimum grace periods and it only referred that you comply with the Clause 13 “Grace Periods” of the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice:

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 action.

The charge that was levied is unreasonable for overstaying in the car park for 11 minutes while you haven’t confirmed what is the Grace Period for the XXXXXX Road car park. Your defence conveniently stated that you comply with the minimum requirement of 10 minutes Grace Period without specifying the actual Grace Period. The signage terms and conditions on the day didn’t confirm the Grace Period and the charge that was levied is unreasonable for overstaying in the car park for 11 minutes.

No evidence of Landowner Authority

As ParkingEye Limited doesn’t not have proprietary interest in the land, I required that you produce an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner, which was not provided to the POPLA assessor. The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including exemptions - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do and any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

As I have argued to POPLA, witness statements are not sound evidence of the above.
Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in the BPA CoP) and basic information such as the land boundary and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to charge.

Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance which was not done at the POPLA appeal stage:

7.1 “If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you the authority to carry out all the aspects of car park management for the site that you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the BPA Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges”. The operator has not provided any evidence of this.
7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.
7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:
A) the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined
any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation
C) any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement
D) who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs
E) the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement

The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge

ParkingEye Limited has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. The appellant has not been identified as the driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the relevant parking event. For the operator to transfer liability for unpaid parking charges from the driver of the vehicle, to the registered keeper of the vehicle, the regulations laid out in PoFA 2012 must be adhered to.

ANPR system

During the POPLA process, I still haven’t seen specific evidence confirming the ANRP system in place and the time stamps have complied with the BPA COP, article 20.5:

When issuing a parking charge notice you may use photographs as evidence that a vehicle was parked in an unauthorised way. The photographs must refer to and confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised. A date and time stamp should be included on the photograph. All photographs used for evidence should be clear and legible and must not be retouched or digitally altered.

Car park signage

My POPLA appeal clearly states my position that the signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself. In addition, the signage did not specify the Grace Period which is key clause to the current claim and any grace period above 10 minutes would have been sufficient to make the overstay compliant with the outlined terms and conditions.

Should you seek to proceed with the court claim, my arguments above will form one part of any defence that is required should an MCOL be issued.

I expect you to now cancel this 'parking charge' and admit your non-compliance with the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice.

I expect to hear from you within 14 days to confirm that the charge is cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Name
date
Address

KeithP

Parcaal, that might not be the right sort of response to a LBC.

Have you seen the sample robust LBC responses linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread?

Does their LBC meet the requirements of the recently introduced Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims?
E.g. do they give you 14 days notice or 30 days notice?

Can you perhaps show us the LBC?

parcaal

KeithP wrote: »

Parcaal, that might not be the right sort of response to a LBC.

Have you seen the sample robust LBC responses linked from post #2 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread?

Does their LBC meet the requirements of the recently introduced Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims?
E.g. do they give you 14 days notice or 30 days notice?

Can you perhaps show us the LBC?

hi KeithP,

They appear to be compliant, they state it on the top of Page 2.

See link to the full LBC letter here

I have read the LBC post, but it generally talks about defences when it gets to court. I struggled to find an example that covers my Grace Period basis - as really this is my main argument....

parcaal

I am so confused, do I still need to use the Pre-Action Protocol text?

Also, I planned you return their Reply form - I assume I need to include both the Form and my letter?

KeithP

parcaal wrote: »

They appear to be compliant, they state it on the top of Page 2.

Please don't believe all a PPC tells you. Check it yourself.

parcaal wrote: »

I have read the LBC post, but it generally talks about defences when it gets to court.

No it doesn't.
Post #2 of the NEWBIES thread covers everything from receiving a LBC to attending court and beyond.
The first few sentences of that post have exactly what you are looking for.
The first two links are to robust LBC rebuttal letters.

parcaal wrote: »

I struggled to find an example that covers my Grace Period basis - as really this is my main argument....

Yes, mention that you will be relying on Grace Periods if you wish, but you LBC rebuttal is probably not the place for an in depth disclosure of your arguments.

Any discussion on grace periods is probably best left for your Defence and Witness Statement.

[Deleted User]

Also, I planned you return their Reply form - I assume I need to include both the Form and my letter?

You can use the reply form if you wish. Where you are not asking for time to pay, you should not complete the financial/earnings form which, frankly, is none of their [ahem] business!