Parkingeye fine - Aire Street Leeds

Silvercloud18

Hi,

Looking for a bit of help/guidance with regards to my appeal. I'm new to posting here but have read threads regarding this until I'm cross eyed as it's really playing havoc with my anxiety with this holding over me.

I've had my appeal to parkingeye declined today so now need to prepare my POPLA appeal.

I don't know why it was declined from Parkingeye as no information seems to be given except for I should have paid to park. I included a lot in my appeal to them but it seems to have been ignored so not sure if I was on the right lines.

The fine was issues on the grounds of not paying parking for a 15 miniute stay.

The car was driven in to Aire street car park, looked for a space on the front, tried to drive round but met by a big mound of rubble, reversed round to the back, the car park was ridiculously packed with cars all over the place so trying to navigate round was almost impossible, read the terms on back wall which you needed to get out the car to do and as it was dark light up with a phone. Terms weren't agreed as wasn't clear at 4.30pm whether to pay a day rate till 6.30pm or day and night rate. Left the car park for alternative parking. Totalling 15 mins in the grounds.

Would it help if I posted my initial appeal to Parkingeye?

Any help would be appreciated as I just feel a bit lost with it all now.

Silvercloud18

I should also note that my car wasn't registered at my new address :-/ which I have now sent off to the DVLA to change address but they had to find me via a credit report.

Coupon-mad

The car was driven in to Aire street car park, looked for a space on the front, tried to drive round but met by a big mound of rubble, reversed round to the back, the car park was ridiculously packed with cars all over the place so trying to navigate round was almost impossible, read the terms on back wall which you needed to get out the car to do and as it was dark light up with a phone. Terms weren't agreed as wasn't clear at 4.30pm whether to pay a day rate till 6.30pm or day and night rate. Left the car park for alternative parking. Totalling 15 mins in the grounds.

Sounds reasonable if you explain all of that sequence of events to POPLA and use another Aire Street POPLA appeal as your base, so it becomes very long (deliberate)! We had one about Aire St posted here much more recently than the old one I think you were looking at earlier.

Would it help if I posted my initial appeal to Parkingeye?

Yes please.

Silvercloud18

My original appeal to Parkingeye. I don't know if I rambled on a bit too much... is it normal for them to ignore completely every point?

I am writing to appeal the PCN (ref) dated ....2017 for car reg..... I can confirm the registered address is in the process of being changed with the DVLA and will now be registered at the address as per your credit report.

Can you please provide me with the relevant legislation advising that a credit check can be carried out without consent and what data was provided other than an address?


I am disputing this charge due to the fact the car was never actually parked in the Aire Steet, Leeds car park, merely entered, navigated round and left to find alternative parking.


There are no clearly mark out bays and cars were double parked and blocking other cars in. This was not suitable for safe parking and made trying to navigate round the car park extremely difficult and time consuming. There was a great risk, if the car was parked of coming back to be damaged or blocked in and not worth the risk with a disabled passenger who requires space to get in and out.


Tp see costs/terms of parking you have to go to the very back of the car park and there was a small sign on the wall, not lit up by any form of lighting and baring in mind at 4.30pm in December it is pitch black. In order to get to this is was extremely difficult and as there was no space for a 3 point turn had to reverse around to the sign from the front spaces. If there is a sign as you enter in the dark this is NOT lit and NOT clearly visable when driving in, as stated the only sign that could be seen was on the back wall of the car park. This fails to meet the BPA Code of practice Section 18.1 and 18.2.

"18.1 A driver who uses your private car park with your permission does so under a licence or contract with you. If they park without your permission this will usually be an act of trespass. In all cases, the driver’s use of your land will be governed by your terms and conditions, which the driver should be made aware of from the start. You must use signs to make it easy for them to find out what your terms and conditions are.

18.2 Entrance signs play an impor tant par t in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore, as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of. Entrance signs must follow some minimum general principles and be in a standard format. The size of the sign must take into account the expected speed of vehicles approaching the car park"


As there are no signs visable without having to leave your car (back wall sign) this also a noncompliance of BPA Code of practice Section 18.9.

"18.9 So that disabled motorists can decide whether they want to use the site, there must be at least one sign containing the terms and conditions for parking that can be viewed without

needing to leave the vehicle. Ideally this sign must be close to any parking bays set aside for disabled motorists. "

A disabled car user would not be able to see this sign from their car. There were also no disabled bays for a disabled passenger requiring the additional space to get out of the car.

Once the sign on the back had been read, the terms of parking were not agreed with due to it not being clear on day/night set charges. As it was approx 4.30pm it was not clear if to pay day rate expiring at 6pm and then the 12 hour night rate also there after. Due to this being extremely unclear and knowing the stay would only be approx 2/3 hours it was decided to park else where.

!!!12288;


The decision was made to leave the car park for alternative parking with the assumption a grace period would have been given when deciding whether to accept the terms of parking or not in this case. This should have been given in accordance with section 13.1 and 13.2

!!!12288;

"13.1 If a driver is parking without your permission, or at locations where parking is not normally permitted they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that oppor tunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.

13.2 If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes. "


This charge relates to being a mere 5 minutes over the minimum grace period. This is unreasonable due to the fact it would have been straight in and out if the signage was clear and the car parking bays were marked out so people knew were to park without causing hazards. This resulted in entering and exiting the car park taking far longer than the couple of minutes this should have took to decide whether to agree or disagree with the terms of parking. There was no space to turn a car round and carefully reversing to the entrance/exit was required. There was more than one car trying to do this at a time and it became hectic. The terms of parking have not been agreed therefore no contract is in place with the driver and the landowner.


Therefore in summary I appealing on the following:

1) The car was never parked in the car park

2) The car was never left and exited the car park

3) Extremely unclear signage and charges not clear

4) No clear bays making the car park hard to navigate round

5) No contract was agreed

6) Minimal time of 15 minutes in the car park does not justify this fee at all. This is 5 minutes over the minimum grace period is reasonable due to the fact it would have been straight in and out if the signage was clear, and the car parking bays not being marked out caused the entering and exiting the car park to take far longer than the couple of minutes this should have took to decide whether to agree or disagree with the terms of parking.

Due to the above it would make your PCN charge invalid.


In addition to this please find attached evidence relating to points made in this appeal:

1) Location of alternative car park used in which terms were accepted (Wellington Street, Leeds)
2) A call placed to Leeds city Council mobile parking to pay the charge for this parking.
3) Receipt from the company appointed by the council to take payment
4) google picture of poor signage
5) Aerial view of car park pointing out issues


Finally, please can I have a copy of your contract with the landowner, in specific setting out your terms for issuing fines for this specific car park?

The_Deep

I don't know why it was declined from Parkingeye as no information seems to be given except for I should have paid to park

Simple, they want money.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences.

Parking Eye, Smart and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (who take hundreds of these cases to court, and nearly always lose), who have also been reported to the regulatory authority.

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

Silvercloud18

Typical! Thought I had gone down the wrong lines with what I wrote

Silvercloud18

Any pointers/critique on my original appeal and where I can do better for the POPLA one will be much appreciated :-)

Coupon-mad

The decision was made to leave the car park for alternative parking

If you have proof of paying for that alternative parking include a scan of that ticket/screenshot of the App used if it's clear that the parking period followed the car leaving.

POPLA like evidence of seeking parking elsewhere. It shows no contract was agreed here.

Your explanation about why it took 15 minutes (bad surface, bad signage, small bays, no disabled bays visible, no signs visible in the dark, and even when a sign was sought out, the day/night rate were so ambiguous, the driver & disabled passenger decided not to accept the offer, and left and parked elsewhere) is good to repeat in point #1 which can be called:

1. The vehicle was not parked and this car park is unlit, has a very bad road surface, bay markings, worn machine screens & keypads, graffiti on signs, and ambiguous terms and a lack of disabled bays, which makes it impossible for POPLA to find that a contract was agreed.

Then copy the usual template stuff from the NEWBIES thread.

Find recent Aire Street threads and use THEIR photos for your POPLA appeal. I'm sure there was one last month with pics of a vandalised/black painted sign. Use that, or if you cannot find that thread after searching 'AIRE STREET POPLA' go get some incriminating pics!!

Did you tick 'driver' when you appealed?

Have you seen a copy of the NTK? Was it dated in time to arrive within 15 days?

KeithP

You need to read post #3 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

In there you will find comprehensive details on how to construct a PoPLA appeal.

Use all the points you can.

Cobble together your draft and post here for critique.


Alternatively, start as C-m suggests.
Use the forum search facility to find other Aire Street PoPLA appeals.

Silvercloud18

I have pictures of my call placed to pay for the the council carpark (date and time) I parked in and then I called them and they sent me a receipt/invoice type thing. although it does not specify the date in which is was parked but shows I only parked there once in December :-/

I actually live 70 miles away from the carpark or I would go at a similar time ie darkness to show how you can't see the signs.

The original letter I got assumingly went to my old address they used a credit check agency to get my new address. So no, it didn't arrive within 15 days but the original would have. I'm not entirely comfortable with what data they got from this credit check but I guess that's a fight for another day.

I believe I ticked registered keeper. Is there anyway to check?

Thanks for the time I'll come back and post my draft asap.

Coupon-mad

I have pictures of my call placed to pay for the the council carpark (date and time) I parked in and then I called them and they sent me a receipt/invoice type thing. although it does not specify the date in which is was parked but shows I only parked there once in December

Great!

I actually live 70 miles away from the carpark or I would go at a similar time ie darkness to show how you can't see the signs.

OK so find the pics other people have shown on their Aire Street threads in recent weeks/months, and use them. Embed them into your word document looong appeal making it like an illustrated story (not uploading photos separately to POPLA). One document is easier for the Assessor to follow.

I believe I ticked registered keeper. Is there anyway to check?

No, but if you've seen a picture of the NTK and it would have arrived in time, and it had the POFA words on the back, then POPLA won't listen to a 'no keeper liability' argument anyway v ParkingEye, as their NTKs are considered compliant, when served in time with the right wording.