Visitor bay, permit not "clearly displayed", linkparking, do we have a case?

kaihoisa

Hi all,

I've read the FAQ's, a lot of info but we're clueless on this kind of thing so a bit intimidating! So I wonder if we could get an appraisal of our situation? Obv don't mind searching through the FAQ's, just asking for a bit of initial help if possible?

EDIT: Having just registered I'm not allowed to post links, I've edited so you can still follow, hope you don't mind? (No spam, I promise!)

Just as a bit of background, on 6/8/17 we found a private ticket from Link on my gf's car - it was parked in a visitor bay around my flat, we have a valid permit which we'd moved onto an indented bit of the dashboard (more later). We appealed with Link on the basis that it was clearly visible if the attendant had moved around the car (which he had, photos from every angle but steering wheel was blocking the permit on their photo!!). They rejected the appeal with a pretty ignorant response, which didn't address the point. I replied with some mild abuse then we paid the ticket. Thisis background, I appreciate probably no comeback on this now we've paid.

Yesterday we retured from holiday to find a "Notice to Keeper" in the post, dated 6/9/17, relating to parking on the date of 4/8/17 (two days before the ticket referred to above). Link to this below as pic is huge:

imgur dot com slash GnBxnMY

First thing, we never saw a parking ticket for this one. Their photos on website do show a parking ticket stuck to windscreen, so I can only assume either the attendant or a passer-by removed it before we had a chance to see.

Again, their website has photos of the car, but this time they've actually left the permit slightly visible in one of them (interestingly, their URL for this photo includes the word 'penalty', which I understand is what they're trying to avoid with the "contractual agreement" wording?) Link below, the permit is by the left of the wheel, it had been blocked by wheel in photos on the one we paid:
imgur dot com slash iVIByLm

We think this is ridiculous. There's no wording on the sign about how clear it needs to be, link to sign below:

imgur dot com slash KA5rZFk

And more so, we think that as mentioned above, the attendant must have seen the ticket was there, even if it wasn't in the 'correct place' on the front window. Pretty much the only thing I know about this parking stuff is that they rely on a 'contractual agreement'. It cannot be reasonable to believe we'd have aticket but leave it slightly out of the way because we actually preferred to pay a parking charge rather than park for free! Some photo's Ive taken below having replaced the permit in the same position it was, to demonstrate how easy it is to see from various positions around the car (none are zoomed in!):

imgur dot com slash a slash ezC1C

The back of the letter we received yesterday says in small print:

"At the time the parking charge was incurred, a Notice to Driver was affixed to the vehicle. This offered the driver the ability to appeal within 21 days from its imposition. This opportunity has now lapsed and we regret the ability to appeal against this charge is nolonger available. If you consider there to be exceptional circumstances as to why you should be allowed to appeal outside of this period then please write to/e-mail (appropriate addresses).

My gf phoned them yesterday and was told to put an appeal in anyway, but amount would not be reduced because they've had to pay DVLA for our details. (Which they already had from the previous ticket we paid!!).

That's all the pertinent info I can think of. I'd really appreciate it if you guys could advise if we'll need to pay this or not? As above, I think it's ridiculous on the basis that the permit was there in the car and I don't believe that the guy won't have seen it. The money isn't in itself a problem but I hate companies like this.

Thanks,

-parking noob

Redx

do you have to pay it ? = NO not unless a judge in civil court says so

yes you may have a legal case but nothing can be guaranteed in court and it all depends what your lease or AST says too

LINK have several cout cases and residents parking cases on the go so read about those on here and in parking pranksters blogs

there are many of their cases where common sense has not prevailed, even if residents own or lease their parking spaces

this may not even be about the permit being on display or not, possibly its about your right to peaceful enjoyment and your right to park unfettered in your own parking space, even without any permit at all !!

only a court case can determine if you are correct or not , so let a judge decide

these resident parking matters are complicated by nature, so dont assume its an easy answer or an easy legal case, it isnt

Coupon-mad

NTK:

https://imgur.com/GnBxnMY

sign:

https://imgur.com/KA5rZFk

Link below, the permit is by the left of the wheel, it had been blocked by wheel in photos on the one we paid:

https://imgur.com/iVIByLm

Some photo's Ive taken below having replaced the permit in the same position it was, to demonstrate how easy it is to see from various positions around the car (none are zoomed in!):

https://imgur.com/a/ezC1C

My gf phoned them yesterday

Please tell your gf to stop doing that; never again phone a notorious ex-clamper bunch thinking you will have a normal conversation - what do you think their agenda is? It's not parking management! Seriously, it is not - at all. If everyone was untouchable with permits securely attached/obvious from all angles, they would make no money, so some of these firms just invent a reason to allege a contravention.

This industry is rotten, greedy and a pariah, absolute scum (MPs called them 'cowboys' this year) and you need to make complaints to Trading Standards (NOT the CAB, your local TS Officer) and your MP about this business practice.

Also complain (in a group is best - start an 'anti-Link Parking' Facebook page for residents) to your Managing Agents and ask when they are going to kick Link out - why have they allowed the likes of Martin Gardner to harass residents? Keep asking. You do not need a permit at your own home:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/link-parking-lose-lakeshore-case-permit.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/link-parking-lose-lakeshore-residential.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/link-parking-lose-in-court-gladstones.html

this one is interesting, but since wrecked by a bad case in Link v B, so I was told and have seen a transcript:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/link-parking-and-overstone-court.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/link-parking-lose-in-wrexham-flat-owner_2.html

This one is interesting in a different way:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2017/07/link-parking-in-parliamentary-question.html

...was told to put an appeal in anyway, but amount would not be reduced because they've had to pay DVLA for our details.

Did you know that they have to get data every time, but it only costs them £2.50?

We think this is ridiculous.

So do we, it's why we do this every day!

I'd really appreciate it if you guys could advise if we'll need to pay this or not?

Of course not, they are trying it on and now have you on a 'mugs list' because:

- you actually paid one, showing you might pay more

and

- you actually phoned them, showing you are taking them seriously as a normal company.

I hope the above links have shown you that this isn't something to pay, it's something to get angry and complain about and talk to other residents about getting the scum removed. We bet your tenancy agreement or lease does NOT mention £100 charges for parking, nor any obligation to display a permit to exercise your right to park and rights of way.

Right then, so why are you even displaying a permit, let alone paying £100 to scumbags? For now (short term) put that permit up on the dash secured by blutack or a clip that cannot be dislodged by shaking the car (yes...clampers used to do that). Long term, lobby other residents to approach the MA to kick them into touch.

And re this one, you are likely to get a Gladstones claim and we will help you to win it. Your evidence is clear.

kaihoisa

Thanks, I'll take a proper look at these links tomorrow when it's not nealy 3am on a Saturday night

Just to be clear, it was a visitor bay requiring a vistor permit (valid visitor permit referred to in my OP) not a designiated resident spot.

kaihoisa

OK thanks, I've done some reading! First off, I admire what you've created here, a wealth of information and advice.

As Link is IPC, I understand I should use the following template. Note that my gf (the keeper) can't remember if any comment was made about who the driver was during the call she made. In any event, Link say they can't accept telephone appeals because their calls aren't recorded.

Re PCN number: xxxx

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 and are they the landowner?
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, 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 or timer 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, as seems likely based on my research) 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. Your aggressive business practice and unwarranted threat of court for the ordinary matter of a driver using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me. I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle.

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. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

(Girlfriend's name)


A couple of concerns I have:

1) As we didn't actually see the windscreen notice, and the first we heard was the NTK, can they just ignore the above?
2) My GF is the keeper, but we've agrred that I'll follow this process through for her. If we advise Link of this and tell them to direct all correspondence to my address, care of me as a representative, does this cause any issues and is the request likely to be heeded?
3) During my GF's call, they advised that they've already gone to the DVLA - does the appropriate para above need to be tweaked? (i.e. just changed to past tense)

And a question:

4) Is it worth mentioning that the permit is visible in one of their photos and would reasonably have been seen (this is where my anger stems from! Even if they had the right to demand money where a permit wasn't shown, this appears to be gross dishonesty) Or does this kind of thing wait for later/court?

Any help is very much appreciated

Redx

1) they will probably ignore the appeal even if it said she had died 10 years ago ! , there is no profit in accepting appeals and these people are sc@mming ex clampers or similar (just do it anyway , regardless)

2) you do the work but do it in her name, so do the work , agree it with her, get her to "send it" by whatever method they accept, so done in her name, even if you have done 99% of it and she just presses send

3) yes, just alter to past tense although it wont make any difference whatesoever but do it if it makes you happy because it will be "grammatically correct" , these thickos wont even tell the difference

4) ideally its evidence for a court, so why show your hand early ?