PCN question double entry, given as one stay?

HeadOpener

Hi,

I have read through the newbies guide but have a couple of questions please.

So our company has got a PCN for one of our company lease cars. The PCN shows an entry and exit image for a supermarket car park and over a 5 hour stay between hence the issue of the PCN. All of our vehicles are fitted with GPS trackers and this vehicle entered and exited this car park twice during the day each time staying about an hour. The PCN, however, shows the first entry time and the last exit time instead of either one. The issuing parking company in question is ParkingEye and I can, of course, provide the GPS tracking evidence, however I am aware that often appeals get rejected regardless etc.
I am not sure if the standard appeal letter fits because of the circumstances.
So I was wondering if you could please give me some advice.

Oh the PCN is addressed to the company with no names etc on it at all, so far the company has not passed on the current keeper information etc as we are just the lease holders.
Thanks

Redx

just appeal as KEEPER with the standard template and add a paragraph that the vehicle was there for 2 separate short visits and their ANPR systems are faulty which will be proven at POPLA and/or in a court of law if it gets that far

or you follow the BVRLA guidelines and pass on the keeper/hirer/lessee details to avoid POFA2012 holding your company as responsible

the double stay issue is known as "double dipping" and there is plenty of information about this common issue on here, on pepipoo forums and parking pranksters blogsite

Coupon-mad

So our company has got a PCN for one of our company lease cars. The PCN shows an entry and exit image for a supermarket car park and over a 5 hour stay between hence the issue of the PCN. All of our vehicles are fitted with GPS trackers and this vehicle entered and exited this car park twice during the day each time staying about an hour. The PCN, however, shows the first entry time and the last exit time instead of either one. The issuing parking company in question is ParkingEye and I can, of course, provide the GPS tracking evidence, however I am aware that often appeals get rejected regardless etc.
I am not sure if the standard appeal letter fits because of the circumstances.
So I was wondering if you could please give me some advice.

The company could submit an appeal and GPS tracker proof, not using the template.

HeadOpener

Thanks for the fast replies, Is it worth trying to get the Keeper to visit the supermarket and show the GPS evidence to the manager and try to get them to do it?
Or as PE are a BPA member do the appeal online as the company as I have also just noticed the event happened 21 days exactly to date of issue of PCN and I thought it had to be 14 days as well?
So just get a Popla code etc

Redx

it may be worth doing but for now I would submit an appeal to PE on their website as keeper with proof of the tracker info

a landowner or retailer cancellation may work by the hirer but its better to go for the jugular when there is proof positive that their systems are wrong AND they have failed POFA2012 as well

HeadOpener

Appealing with this on the site

Dear Sir,

Parking Charge Ref [XXXXXXX]: Vehicle Registration [XXXXXX]
Formal Dispute

We refer to the above Parking Charge Notice issued by ParkingEye Limited ( "PE" ) to our company ABC Ltd ( "ABC" ) in respect of an alleged contravention of the terms and conditions of parking at XXX by the driver of the above-detailed vehicle on XXX.

We confirm that ABC is the vehicles hirer for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ( "POFA" ) and we write to formally dispute the validity of this charge.

We trust that PE is aware that in order to have the right to claim unpaid parking charges from a vehicles hirer, a creditor must deliver a Notice to Hirer in full compliance with the strict requirements of POFA. However, there are a number of reasons why PEs Notice to Hirer did not comply; we suggest that you carefully study Paragraphs 13 and 14 of Schedule 4 of POFA to understand why.

We also attach for reference the vehicles GPS tracking log for that date. We suggest you review your ANPR data and notice that there are some discrepancies between your PCN claim and the vehicles attendance within the XXX car park in question.

There are no possible circumstances where ABC could be liable for this charge and we therefore require that you confirm that PE shall now cancel this charge. Alternatively, should you still believe that PE has a valid claim against ABC, please provide us with the means to escalate our dispute to the Independent Appeals Service ( "POPLA" ).

Thank you for your cooperation and we look forward to receiving PEs notification that this charge has been cancelled.

Yours faithfully,

Coupon-mad

Perfect.

The_Deep

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.