The Dreaded PCN

jablove

Hi I`m New, So apologies in advance if i look as i have no idea as to what i`m doing.
In short I run a vehicle breakdown and recovery service.. one of my operators had to attend a vehicle in a Excel controlled car park.. OUR APPEAL
You completed the appeal on 16/10/2017 15:33:19.
I am a vehicle recovery operator, employed by Rices Recovery Ltd, Pontypool, NP4 6LG... At the time of the Charge Notice being issued I was not simply parking. I was attending an elderly gentleman who had broken down in the car park who`s vehicle needed to be recovered .. Excel Parking have Rejected My appeal on the grounds that I should have contacted their helpline to advise them of my presence.. I find this inappropriate for the following reasons.. (1) I was attending a elderly person who was in a state of distress due to his breakdown and they had already contacted the the helpline and advised them of his breakdown.. (2) My vehicle is a large lorry which was blocking the roadway around the car park, causing other users to wait until I had loaded the broken down vehicle onto mine and then vacated the car park. (3) The company I work for has had these charges dropped at the first stage of appeal in the past when supplied with evidence of the situation. I have provided Excel Parking with this documentation. So in summery, Excel Parking where advised by my customer that a recovery vehicle would attending him.. My lorry was causing inconvenience to other car park users.. The operation of winching and loading of a vehicle is dangerous to not only myself but also other persons in the vicinity, therefor I had grater concerns on my mind than ringing the helpline...
RESPONSE FROM IAS..
The adjudicator made their decision on 07/11/2017 20:25:01.

The Appellant should understand that the Adjudicator is not in a position to give legal advice to either of the parties but they are entitled to seek their own independent legal advice. The Adjudicator’s role is to consider whether or not the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each individual case. In all Appeals the Adjudicator is bound by the relevant law applicable at the time and is only able to consider legal challenges and not factual mistakes nor extenuating or mitigating circumstances. Throughout this appeal the Operator has had the opportunity consider all points raised and could have conceded the appeal at any stage. The Adjudicator who deals with this Appeal is legally qualified and each case is dealt with according to their understanding of the law as it applies and the legal principles involved. A decision by an Adjudicator is not legally binding on an Appellant who is entitled to seek their own legal advice if they so wish.
The Appellant entered the car park with a job to do - collect an elderly gentleman's vehicle, load it on the transporter, and take it away. The Appellant was in the car park for some 45 minutes and contends that the driver had already called the helpline regarding assistance being called. I find it ludicrous that the operator cannot simply withdraw the ticket when faced with evidence from the Appellant that proves he was attending in the course of his employment to assist another motorist. What is even more frustrating is that on a legal basis the Parking Charge Notice was lawfully issued, and as adjudicator I am unable to consider mitigation. On this basis the appeal has to be dismissed, but I would strongly urge the operator to reconsider their position, as if this case went on to the county court a judge would I am sure not look kindly on the operator...
Now we have a notice of intended court proceedings.. What else can i do just wait until i get a court summons ? appoint a solicitor at cost ? or just give in and pay the £100 ? Your thoughts & advise would be much appreciated

Loadsofchildren123

represent myself

Defend it.
Use that statement by the adjudicator: "I find it ludicrous that the operator cannot simply withdraw the ticket when faced with evidence from the Appellant that proves he was attending in the course of his employment to assist another motorist.... I would strongly urge the operator to reconsider their position, as if this case went on to the county court a judge would I am sure not look kindly on the operator..."
You did not enter the car park with the intention of parking. You did not park. You deny that any contract was formed. I don't think there is any case law on this specific scenario, but Jopson could be used to say this isn't parking (in that case it was loading/unloading).


I doubt there was ANYTHING on the signs saying what a recovery vehicle should do (phone the PPC to explain its presence).


You couldn't have complied with their T&C anyway, which probably say you must park in a marked bay - you had to stop next to the car you were recovering so it was impossible for you to comply with the T&C. Any contract (if it was capable of being formed, which I say it wasn't) will have been frustrated.


What a load of nonsense. The parking industry at its worst!


Write a strong letter NOW to the parking company to say that if they proceed you will resist in the strongest possible terms, you will complain to the DVLA and you will counterclaim for breach of your rights under the DPA [note to those more in the know than me about DPA: does a company have DPA rights and can a company sue for breaches?].


Are they trying to sue YOU or the company?

Fruitcake

Start by reading the Sticky thread for NEWBIES, especially post which has a handy guide to court by Bargepole.

Forget your poll.

You should respond robustly to the LBC.

More court savvy posters will be along soon, but you need to start reading the NEWBIEs in the meantime.

pappa_golf

represent your self , quote the above statement by a qualified barrista / solisitor , if gladrags issue paperwork , ask for a barrista to attend court


Caution: as you are a company , excel can choose court of there liking might be a long drive from wales , just to find they don,t turn up

jablove

My employee at his home address,, As in their words he had to provide the appeal as it was his responsibility as the driver to comply with their terms and conditions.

pappa_golf

parking companies lie ,

let this one roll , please send me tickets to the court

PS , lets hope the prankster picks up on this , I love ridicule on a tuesday

still want that bsarrista in court tho ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

pappa_golf

I would like to see excel try this with the AA or RAC

I fear the outcome would cost excel much monies after AA/RAC had finished with them

my postman was relating about ANPR ltd , in the clamping days (post office delivery vans), lets just say , ANPR lost

Coupon-mad

represent myself

Defend it.

That's not parking for a start and you have the IAS decision to wave around. Excel should be ashamed.

jablove

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 20/10/2017 11:02:27.

The Operator Reported That...

The appellant was the driver.
ANPR/CCTV was used.
The Notice to Keeper was sent on 14/09/2017.
A response was recieved from the Notice to Keeper.
The ticket was issued on 14/09/2017.
The charge is based in Contract.

The Operator Made The Following Comments...

1. The Walk Car Park, Ebbw Vale is private land, which motorists are permitted to enter to park their vehicle, provided that they abide by any displayed conditions of parking.

2. There are 22 signs on site, including: 3 Entrance Signs (1250mm x 660mm), 7 Information Signs (1250mm x 660mm) and 5 Tariff Boards (1200mm x 1000mm). There are also 5 Pay and Display machines with 5 “Pay Here” arrow signs erected at a height of approximately 2.5 metres. Site photographs supplied confirm that the signs can be observed at the entrance and throughout the car park.

3. The signage states: “This is a 24 Hour Pay on Entry Pay & Display Car Park” and “A maximum of 10 minutes is allowed to purchase a valid Pay and Display ticket after a vehicle has entered the car park. If this period is exceeded a Parking Charge Notice will be issued”.

4. Management of the car park is conducted by ANPR cameras, which take photographs of vehicle registration numbers as vehicles enter and leave the car park. The VRM images are compared with tickets purchased at the P&D machines and any vehicle that remains on the car park for 10 minutes and fails to purchase a valid P&D ticket is issued a Parking Charge Notice.

5. ANPR images supplied show that the appellant’s vehicle was observed entering the car park at 14:36 and exiting at 15:14, a recorded stay of 38 minutes.

6. A search of the Pay & Display data for The Walk, Ebbw Vale car park for the date of the contravention shows that no P&D ticket was purchased with a VRM matching or resembling the appellant’s ‘RR03TOW’ from before the appellant’s arrival into the car park, until beyond the expiry of the 10 minutes grace period. Further to this, the data demonstrates that Pay & Display machines on site were successfully issuing tickets during the period of the appellant’s stay.

7. In their appeal the appellant admits to not purchasing a Pay & display ticket and states “At the time of the Charge Notice being issued I was not simply parking. I was attending an elderly gentleman who had broken down in the car park who`s vehicle needed to be recovered... Excel Parking have Rejected My appeal on the grounds that I should have contacted their helpline to advise them of my presence.” We note that the appellant states “Excel Parking where advised by my customer that a recovery vehicle would attending him.” The appellant also mentions, in his appeal to the IAS that, “My vehicle is a large lorry which was blocking the roadway around the car park, causing other users to wait until I had loaded the broken down vehicle onto mine and then vacated the car park.”

8. The helpline telephone number is displayed on our signage for any motorist who is experiencing any difficulties or who has any queries. This service was not utilised by the appellant. Had the appellant contacted our helpline at the earliest practical opportunity and reported that they were attending a breakdown then advice would have been given to them or provisions made which could have prevented the PCN. We must advise that having followed internal investigation, the call made by the individual whose vehicle had broken down was before the appellant’s recovery vehicle had arrived on site and therefore no provisions could be made in respect of their vehicle as details were not supplied. It remained the appellant’s sole responsibility as driver of the vehicle on site to make use of the helpline if they wished for provisions to be made in light of their situation.

9. When entering this private land it is solely the responsibility of the motorist to familiarise themselves with and to fully comply with the Terms and Conditions displayed. In this situation the appellant had options: they could have either purchased a Pay & Display ticket in respect of their stay or made use of the helpline to report the situation they were in. By not taking such appropriate actions they were correctly observed to be in breach of the Terms and Conditions of entry to the site.

10. The appellant became liable for a Parking Charge Notice as per the Terms and Conditions displayed by failing to purchase a valid Pay & Display ticket.

jablove

PCN Ref No: EPS16329898
VRM: RR03TOW

It is with great astonishment that you still pursue my employee Mr John Phillips for a outstanding PCN by means of a notice of intended court proceedings. Mr Phillips entered the car park with a job to do, which was to recover a broken down vehicle. At no point did my employee simply park the recovery vehicle he was using, he was there for the purpose of loading the broken down vehicle onto his recovery vehicle so therefore how can a parking charge apply. Furthermore by him not parking but loading he did not enter a legitimate contract with yourselves, therefore you are in breach of the data protection act by obtaining the vehicle's ownership details from the DVLA .
If the PCN & Notice Of Court Proceedings are not dropped with immediate effect I will instruct my solicitors to represent my employee in court, counterclaim for the breach of the data protection act and make a formal complaint to the DVLA.
For your information here is a copy of the IAS adjudicator`s thoughts. "I find it ludicrous that the operator cannot simply withdraw the ticket when faced with evidence from the Appellant that proves he was attending in the course of his employment to assist another motorist.... I would strongly urge the operator to reconsider their position, as if this case went on to the county court a judge would I am sure not look kindly on the operator..."

Regards

Justin Rice (director)
John Phillips (Employee)
Rice's Recovery Ltd,

pappa_golf

they will look fools when the reply to the appeal (IPC) is read in court , a person (solisitor or barrista) hired by a UK authorized independent appeal system has suggested that they drop it ,

can I order popcorn now or shall I wait