13 Minute Overstay Appeal

Katman80

Hi All,

A quick overview - just before Christmas on 22nd December, we parked in a city centre car park around back of a solicitors and went into to town for a Christmas meal with friends. The car park was private and the appointed operator is ParkingEye. We got out of the car and went to the ticket machine and purchased a ticket for two hours. The car park has no lighting installed and none of the PE signs are illuminated.

At the weekend, we had a PCN arrive from PE stating that their ANPR cameras had clocked us arriving at 19:21 and leaving a 21:38 a total stay of 2 hours 17 minutes. The times printed on our ticket are 19:25 – 21:25. So our overstay time against the time purchase is 13 minutes – that is of course assuming the ANPR camera time is correct. I am currently heavily pregnant (due date tomorrow!) so could do without this issue but I’ve written the appeal below and thought I would post it up here before submitting it the PE.

We took photos at the same time of evening on the day we received the notice. I’ve included links to pictures of the signs in my appeal letter below but as a new user I've had to remove the prefix but if you copy and paste the URL it will work. The t&cs are in tiny font and impossible to read at night. Their sign is also ambiguous as it lists the tariffs followed by: “Please enter full, correct vehicle registration into the Pay & Display machine when purchasing a ticket. Failure to comply with this could result in a Parking Charge of £100” the operative word being “this” – I’m assuming “this” refers to entering the vehicle reg in the machine..

Also in their letter they state: “The signage, which is clearly displayed at the entrance to and throughout the car park, states that is is private land and that the car park is managed by Parking Eye Ltd. In addition the signage stats that as a maximum stay car park, a Parking Charge is applicable if the vehicle remains within the car park for longer than the 0 hours 0 minutes max stay time.” This specific wording does not appear on the sign (I’ve taken a picture of the small font T&Cs in the daylight and read through them).

I’m struggling to find out who the land owner is – unfortunately it is not a retail park / supermarket etc. I do know that it does not belong to the solicitors that the car park is located behind.

Anyway here is my appeal – if there are any recommendations for removing / adding anything please do let me know. I have contemplated adding in a paragraph about being pregnant and the equality act but not exactly certain what would add weight? (I can obviously prove to them that I'm pregnant )

Many thanks!

K

---

KeithP

Hi Katman80, welcome to the forums.

You are of course free to send anything you like in your appeal, but have you seen the already written template appeal text in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread?

You might be wise to save all that specific stuff until your POPLA appeal.
Your choice though.

Katman80

Hi Keith,

Thank you very much for your reply.

I had indeed read the newbie thread (and multiple other websites on this 'popular' topic )

I thought that by sending in the standard template (that I'm sure they get to read a few times every day), would result in a standard rejection template in kind. So I thought that at least making a few points as why I was contesting the charge that there might at least be a chance of a successful cancellation of the PCN at the first hurdle. Upon reflection, I think you're right - showing 'my hand' this early is probably unwise and I should keep this appeal in my back pocket should it move on to the next stage.

In your opinion would you agree with my additions / edits to the template paragraphs below:

---

I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. There is no presence of lighting nor illuminated signage within the car park and therefore your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are illegible to drivers during the hours of darkness.

A ticket was purchased and displayed in the vehicle. The BPA Code Of Practice Section 13 requires you to provide reasonable grace periods upon arriving and leaving the car park. I believe that this has not been taken into consideration before your system generated the 'PCN'.

---

I have retained the ticket and can upload a photo of it to them but obviously the time stamps on the ticket and the ANPR system differ by 17 minutes (in total). I presume they can check that a ticket was purchased from the number plate anyway..

Thanks again,

K

nosferatu1001

You get a standard rejection regardless. It’s not worth their time to read anything.

KeithP

In my opinion, neither of those additions will make any difference.

You are equally likely to get an appeal accepted because PE spot the template appeal from this forum so it goes in the 'too difficult to get money' pile.

But as I said yesterday, your choice.

Katman80

Just to let you know that as expected my appeal to ParkingEye was rejected.

I went to POPLA and submitted an appeal to them using plenty of evidence that I'd gathered along with a few stock points from the newbies thread.

I'm pleased to say today POPLA informed me that ParkingEye were not contesting my appeal

Thanks go out to all on this thread and the forum members that clearly contribute so much time and effort to help people fight back against these companies taking advantage of an unregulated industry.

Although I've spent more hours on this than I should, it has been fascinating to learn about this industry and it beggars belief that the government haven't clamped (pardon the pun) down on it. If you like stats, the annual POPLA reports for 2016 and 2017 are an interesting read!

KeithP

Hi Katman80, thanks for the feedback. Glad you won.

Last month our MPs debated a Private Members Bill about this so-called industry and it was good to see unanimous cross party support for reform.

Have a look at this video:
http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

I am sure your MP would be pleased to hear your views on this subject.

The_Deep

13 minutes is well within the grace periods, please read the BPA Code of Practice.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.