Metrolink Careparking Fine

Tentatively

Hello all,

The Driver of a vehicle parked on a Metrolink Park and Ride carpark received a windscreen PCN from CareParking/Anchor Security Services stating “unauthorised parking in a reserved bay”. The parking charge is £100, reduced to £60 if paid within the allotted time. The notice references Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012.

As CareParking is a member of BPA, on the 26th day after issue, The Keeper will be sending an email to their appeals email with the following:

Re xxxxxxxxxx:

I appeal and dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn, nor was there an agreed contract. Your signage terms fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence of the parking charge, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis, which is fully distinguished.

Should you fail to cancel this PCN, I require with your rejection letter, all images taken of this vehicle & the signs at the location that day. Do not withhold any images or data later relied on for POPLA/court.

Firms of your ilk were unanimously condemned in 2018 as operating an 'outrageous scam' (Hansard 2.2.18). The BPA & IPC were heavily criticised too; hardly surprising for an industry where so-called AOS members admit to letting victims 'futilely go through the motions' of appeal and say on camera 'we make it up sometimes' (BBC Watchdog).

I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner, as well as complaining in writing to my MP and ensuring that they are appraised of the debate where Parliament agreed unanimously: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists...should not have to put up with this''.

Formal note:

Service of any rejection letter/POPLA code and/or legal documents by email is expressly disallowed. All responses to me from this point on, must be made by post. Regardless of any MCOL online/email system, service of any court claim must only be made by first class post to the latest address provided by me.

Yours faithfully,

FULL NAME,
ADDRESS
POSTCODE

(Does The Keeper need their signature on here as well?)

No other information or supporting evidence will be sent. I fully expect this to be rejected and The Keeper will then draft a POPLA appeal, which I will keep this thread updated with.

After reading many other threads on this forum, I’m assuming The Keeper should look into byelaws as this is a TfGM Metrolink carpark. I’m not entirely sure where The Keeper would look to ascertain if the byelaws occurred on the land. Would this be on the signage?

Thanks all.

I've read a lot of the suggested threads on here, please feel free to point me to any points I may have missed.

Fruitcake

Sign with an illegible squiggle if you have to send by post, first class from a Post Office counter and get a proof of posting.
Preferably, appeal online or by email if possible and take screenshots.
Use whatever method is specified by the scammers and send around day 26 as per the NEWBIES.

Everything else seems to be good so far, including researching byelaws. Revisit the site and take pics of the entrance and signs. Look for railway signs for byelaws. Also contact TFGM direct if you can't get the answers you need.

KeithP

Immediately under that blue text appeal in the NEWBIES FAQ thread is some guidance on how to send it - well worth reading.

Just a squiggle signature is fine, but do ensure you include your full name and address. No 'signed for' posting.
Well worth reading all the guidance.

Coupon-mad

(Does The Keeper need their signature on here as well?)

No, not for an emailed appeal.

After reading many other threads on this forum, I'm assuming The Keeper should look into byelaws as this is a TfGM Metrolink carpark. I'm not entirely sure where The Keeper would look to ascertain if the byelaws occurred on the land. Would this be on the signage?

No, not on signs but you should be able to Google & find it.

Hopefully you will never receive a Notice to keeper, which hands you 100% POPLA win!

Tentatively

Thanks all for the extremely quick responses.

I will be submitting the appeal by email, so will not be signing my signature as per Coupon-mad's advice.

I will be passing the car park tomorrow so will take pictures of the entrance and signs as suggested.

Here's hoping the NTK isn't posted within the allotted time allowed. Glad I've not taken up too much of your time or caused anybody frustration!

You're all money savers!

Tentatively

Regarding Byelaws, I found this:

PARKING OF VEHICLES

1. Without prejudice to the other provisions of these Byelaws, no Person shall park or drive or cause to be parked or driven any vehicle on any part of the System or otherwise in such a position or manner as is likely to cause or does cause obstruction to any Vehicle or to the System or to the Persons using or intending to use the System.

I will take this that byelaws do apply in this case. Could I ask, what is the effect of this against the PCN? I've done some searching but couldn't find a detailed answer.

Coupon-mad

OK it means you (a registered keeper appellant, not a driver appellant) can show POPLA that you are not liable because parking on that land is subject to byelaws. Therefore it is 'not relevant land', which excludes it completely from any 'keeper liability' provisions in the POFA.

You would include that as one of 4 or 5 POPLA appeal points, and you'll win!

Tentatively

Hi all, here's the update:

I stated in my appeal email:

Formal note:

Service of any rejection letter/POPLA code and/or legal documents by email is expressly disallowed. All responses to me from this point on, must be made by post. Regardless of any MCOL online/email system, service of any court claim must only be made by first class post to the latest address provided by me.

Yours faithfully,

FULL NAME,
ADDRESS
POSTCODE

Do they have to correspond via post if you specifically state so? It seems to have been ignored by the company in question. Today I received the following email:

Your appeal has been rejected for the following reasons:
 On 05 Jul 18 this vehicle, Registration <REMOVED> was parked at Metrolink Car Park.
 When parking at Metrolink the driver of this vehicle agreed to pay a Parking
Charge of £100 if they did not park in accordance with the terms printed on the contractual
warning signs.
 The contractual warning signs in place, which you acknowledge in your appeal, state: A
parking charge will be issued when: Obstructive Parking, including parking outside of a
marked parking bay or any unauthorised use of a Parking Space. Your vehicle was parked in
contravention of this term of the contractual warning signs.
 There are contractual warning signs displayed at regular intervals throughout the car park
including a sign prominently displayed at the entrance to this site. The parking of this
vehicle at this location was therefore unauthorised and this charge was issued correctly.
 You are correct that you do not need to name the driver. Regardless of the aforementioned
facts, the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, covers the requirements of the liability of the
charge with regard to the registered keeper. Although you state that you believe the
written notice does not comply with the POFA 2012 you have not stated any grounds for
this. Therefore, we can only assume that this with the rest of your appeal is cut and pasted
from the internet parking forums, which we can evidence at court if required.
 The signage is larger than the minimum size requirements of the British Parking Associations
Approved Operators Scheme Code of Practice.
Photographic evidence supporting the issue of this PCN can be viewed by following the link and
entering your vehicle registration and PCN reference number: <Link to pictures>. Copies
of these photographs are available on request.

The email also provides a POPLA code, so I'll be drafting a POPLA appeal today or tomorrow as per the forums suggestions.

This is currently day 57 and I'm away from home, so I'll need to go back home to check if an NTK has been delivered within the last few days.

As stated above, this was on Metrolink land and therefore Byelaws apply. Still, it'd be nice if the NTK wasn't delivered within the 56 day period.

Thanks for the advice all, I'll update this when I draft the POPLA appeal.

Coupon-mad

Do they have to correspond via post if you specifically state so?

No.

Hopefully no NTK - because that will kill this at POPLA, 100% slam dunk win!

Tentatively

What would happen if the NTK had been sent within the time period but had not been received at my address due to being lost in the post? Do they normally send the NTK recorded delivery or keep proof they sent the NTK?

Coupon-mad

No they don't. The NTK must be served by day 56, not sent/dated.