NCP PCN - Appeal Rejected

byrno25

Hi all,


I have read the newbies thread and can't see anything about PCN's for not parking within the designated lines. I parked in an NCPin York, in the parent and child spaces, however due to a concrete pillar parked on the line to allow me to get the kids out of the car, without getting them out first, making them stand in the car park before I moved the car a couple of inches. This was a windscreen PCN.


This is my appeal letter to NCP (I included a couple of photos)...




To Whom it may concern,


I would like to appeal the PCN ref XXXXXXXXXX from York Tanner Row car park on specified date. As shown in the evidence photographs I was using the parent and child bays on Level 1 as I had two young children with me aged 2 and 3. The bay I was using was the only one available when I arrived and as you can see it is next to a concrete pillar that prevents access to the rear doors of a vehicle if parked within the bay markings. I have therefore parked with my passenger side wheels on the line and have no way impeded on the vehicles in the next bay or prevented any other users from using the car park.


If I had parked within the bay lines it would have meant parking my vehicle, getting out to take one of my children out of the vehicle, leaving them on their own in a busy car park before then moving my car a couple of inches to ensure that I was within the lines. I would then have to do the same in reverse when we returned to the vehicle. I do not feel that it is a risk worth taking with young children and would hope NCP see it the same way.


Upon departing the car park at around 1500 I attempted to speak to the car park attendant to question why the bays are marked as such, however this was met with the response that he “didn’t care” and that “if I didn’t like it, I should lodge an appeal”.


I would suggest that the markings in the parent and child bays in this particular car park are replaced where access to vehicles is impeded by physical structures to ensure that vehicles can park within the lines.


Kind regards






This is the appeal rejection letter I received from NCP...


Dear Mr XXXXXX,

Re: XXXXXXXX issued at York Tanner Row on specified date to vehicle with registration mark XXXXXXXX

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the above notice number. We have considered the case carefully and have decided to reject your appeal on the following grounds;

The parking attendant observed and recorded that the vehicle was not parked wholly within the confines of a marked bay. The Terms and Conditions of which our services are provided are clearly displayed on entrance and throughout our facilities, including the requirement for all motorists to park within the markings of a designated bay.

Your vehicle was recorded as parked outside of a bay. It is clearly signposted that all vehicles must be parked wholly within one designated marked bay at all times for health and safety reasons and therefore would not warrant us in cancelling the notice.
We are confident that all signage and the PCN are compliant with all industry standards and to the British Parking Association's code of practice to which we subscribe.
You now have the following options;
Pay the Parking Charge Notice at the discounted amount of £60.00 within 14 days. Please note that after this time the Parking Charge Notice will increase to the full charge of £100.00.




Welcome any advice on how to proceed. This email was received on 1st March so I'm now outside the 14 day 'discount' period.


Man thanks

Redx

very silly to admit to driving as POFA2012 protection no longer applies

did you get a popla code ?

nosferatu1001

Indeed, the other option should be to appeal to POPLA - did the rejection give you that option?

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for alleged 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 nearly always lose, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P.

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.

byrno25

Hi all,

Yes I know daft to admit it was me driving, should’ve read the newbies thread first. Does that really make a difference though? I’m not disputing that I was the driver. Or is it now more that they have my details?

I do have a POPLA code though, is that now the best route to go down?

I have no intention of paying but at the same time don’t want to get debt collectors letters or a summons/ CCJ etc.

Redx

you wont get a summons as this is not a criminal offence

see this thread here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5811014

if they issue a court claim , its an MCOL (google it)

yes you should use popla , but as I said you have less legal arguments because you admitted to being the driver, so they do not have to comply with POFA2012 and you cannot use those legal arguments at popla or in court to protect yourself as keeper

byrno25

D'oh!


From the boards experience, what is the likely outcome with POPLA?


Thanks again

Redx

it alll depends on if the Ombudsman Service receive a valid evidence pack from the PPC which contains all that is necessary to uphold the claim

such as invcluding some or all of the points below , plus others I may have missed

A VALID LANDOWNER CONTRACT (signed and dated and in force)
good signage and adequately lit if at night
following the relevant CoP from their trade body
following the legal contract laws that apply in parking charge cases
POFA2012 compliance if its a keeper and not a driver
a valid legal argument based on the BEAVIS case

etc

a good popla set of arguments may see them withdraw at an early stage

or they may fail on a single point like witness statements instead of proof of contract, proof of adequate signage etc

a good rebuttal of their eviodence pack may also see them lose

but its a lottery and not all the assessors get it right either

Coupon-mad

It's only NCP, give POPLA a go but you shot several toes off with a driver appeal. Ouch! You have less legs to stand on now. It makes a HUGE difference to the likely outcome. But hey, ho, so what?!

Ignore NCP if you lose at POPLA.

I have read the newbies thread and can't see anything about PCN's for not parking within the designated lines.

I think you missed this Q&A near the top:

Q - ''I have read the NEWBIES thread but cannot find anything specific to my case...my case is different''.

A - NO IT ISN'T. YOU DO NOT NEED SPECIFICS. FORGET THE DETAIL, MOST CASES ARE ALL THE SAME.