Train Station "PenaltyCN"

pappa_golf

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Much has been said about this situation, and no there will be no POPLA for you.

So your aim is to string this out to six months and lobby your local MP to complain about the moves Govia/Indigo are making, putting up clamping signs despite the fact there is no enabling primary legislation allowing clamping, railway byelaws don't allow clamping either (and the previous implied right under common law, was removed by the POFA).

In this case, because it's a penalty rather than a 'parking' charge:



At least that strings it out past Christmas, for a start. Don't expect the NTK to look like a NTK, it will be some scary letter, ranting about prosecution under byelaws. DO NOT put anything *real* in the drivers' details box, all discussed here already:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5722446

That one also shows a suggested (short) template appeal to use specially for these cases.

The risk is the threat of clamping now opening up in these car parks, hence the need NOW, to lobby your MP re this extortion.

as previously asked

clamping by who?

Hockey27

The operators at this car park at CP "add"

Is there a solid chance that this will be thrown out if taken past 6 months. Although I would like to fight it to resolution I'm not sure I will have the time, should I have to pay would rather pay the discounted rate!

Would it be worth appealing to the Operator and TOC stating that parking was paid, but due to a technical issue it was unable to be done till a later date

Maybe important to note that all pay by phone signs are still under SWT and not the new companies name? Might that be a point to argue to extend timeline?


****Sorry, been re-reading the linked thread. Essentially the way to win this is to not name the driver as there is no obligation to do so. Is this correct?

bargepole

The_Deep wrote: »

A most misleading article.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/rail-travellers-lose-right-of-appeal-over-parking-fines-d90m5zdvx

How is this misleading? It says that POPLA will not consider appeals from railway station car parks, and that the train companies are attempting to re-introduce clamping. Both true statements.

This particular journo is one who checks his facts first, and frequently contacts some long-established members of this forum.

Umkomaas

****Sorry, been re-reading the linked thread. Essentially the way to win this is to not name the driver as there is no obligation to do so. Is this correct?

Absolutely correct.

This isn’t likely to go to the Mags Court- we haven’t seen one in a number of years. Only the TOC can prosecute through the MC, it’s not a straightforward and any fine levied goes to the Treasury not the TOC. So you can perhaps see why the TOC (like a number of others) have outsourced (washed their hands of) their car park management.

So, the TOC is unlikely to prosecute, Indigo could only take this to a county court (under contractual law), but they have the massive hurdle of no Keeper liability as railway land is ‘not relevant land’ as per the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. So never offer up the driver’s details.

Is there a solid chance that this will be thrown out if taken past 6 months.

Passing the 6 months milestone means it cannot be prosecuted via the Mags Court. That definitely takes the TOC out of the picture. However, Indigo can pursue an alleged debt through the county court for up to 6 years. But they will struggle with that against the ‘keeper’.

Hockey27

@Umkomaas

Thanks for the info. That is my understanding of things from reading, just after the clarification! As it stands as you say, no keeper liability for a CCJ so hard to prove, so as long as the 6 month mark is reached send communication stating I will take no further part in contact with the operator or anyone associated with them and will consider any further correspondance harassment.

However..... should the TOC push for court they could allege 2 breaches under byelaws which I believe in this case would not be relevant/ could be challenged?

2 (ii) - failure to follow signs put up by an operator - Despite what I guess is an "assumed" grace period no time is stated on the signs by which you must purchase a ticket. The driver in this case paid for a full day ticket therefore complied with this point
3 - failure to pay at appropriate time - Again, as above, no time stated and a full day was paid for.

I did see someone suggest that if the TOC did opt to go to court then it could constitute "abuse of process" as they would have had 2 bites at the cherry?


To aid with the case against these sharks I am also preparing a letter to the DVLA & BPA complaining about the operator. I went back to the car park to check the signage, there are NO signs on the entrance to the car park, and the signage in the car park is as in the newbies thread, "unremarkable and obscure" in small lettering, (this addition to other potential breaches I raised in other posts). Am I right in thinking car park charges must be on these signs too, the parking charges themselves don't appear to be listed anywhere?

At best this is a "loose" application of regulations, but I'm sure some/ most will say this is a standard practice of fraud, deception and blackmail!


Again, thank you all for replying, or reading my posts and offering advice. Please let me know if I can give back in any way

Umkomaas

so as long as the 6 month mark is reached send communication stating I will take no further part in contact with the operator or anyone associated with them and will consider any further correspondance harassment.

You can do - but it’s unlikely to stop them. They are likely to hand things over to powerless debt collectors - that’s absolutely nothing to panic about (read the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #4). You are likely to get a rash of their letters (that’s all they can do) for about 6 months, then it will likely go quiet. They might have another bash towards the end of the 6 years point (but a bit too far away in the future to accurately forecast).

To aid with the case against these sharks I am also preparing a letter to the DVLA & BPA complaining about the operator.

If you want to give the pot a stir, the that’s ok, but if you think it will change your current situation - it’s highly unlikely.

Complaints to the BPA and DVLA can be emailed to:

steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

and DVLA:

david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

At best this is a "loose" application of regulations, but I'm sure some/ most will say this is a standard practice of fraud, deception and blackmail!

Welcome to our world.

Johno100

bargepole wrote: »

How is this misleading? It says that POPLA will not consider appeals from railway station car parks, and that the train companies are attempting to re-introduce clamping. Both true statements.

This particular journo is one who checks his facts first, and frequently contacts some long-established members of this forum.

I'd say it is misleading because from what I gather it is only Indigo cases, because they are going down the 'penalty' route, that POPLA will not hear.

For example only yesterday we had an APCOA station car park case where they are seemingly still going the contractual charge route and have issued a POPLA code to the OP.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5738867

Hockey27

@Johno100

Its not clear what exactly has changed no, and doesn't say that the operators are unable to take you to court, only the TOC, so therefore as per the stock response "offer a POPLA code or drop the charge".

In this case the driver has been served with a "PENALTY" charge notice but not by indigo, it bears mention to byelaws and prosecution but is not from the TOC. Although I have seen information to suggest they are allowed to issue the penalty instead of a parking charge, I have not seen categoric evidence to suggest they can, referring back to "only a magistrate court or a statutory person can impose a penalty", which they are not. So unless they can get a court to make a decision while they are in the field standing behind a car I dare say its complete INSERT ADJECTIVE

Handbags-at-dawn

There is nothing to stop the PPC from prosecuting - that's a red herring. The point is that neither PPCs nor TOCs are likely to take out a private prosecution because it's time-consuming and expensive, they would have to prove who was driving, and even if they succeed the fine goes into the State purse.

Much easier to invent their own unenforceable penalties and frighten people into paying up with threats of prosecution and (now) clamping. At least in the past motorists had some protection from this from POPLA. The BPA only lifted the requirement for PPCs to offer POPLA very recently. So it remains to be seen how many, apart from Indigo, are going to take the chance to by-pass what has proved to be a crucial filter. My guess is they all will, eventually.

The_Deep

It misled me, (and a few others here), Mr C, but perhaps an MA in English Literature does not really equip one to understand all this legal stuff.