UKPC vs NHS staff

Ubees

Hello All,

Just want to run a scenario past you , for your thoughts..

My wife works for the NHS (Hospital) and parks in the staff carpark. It has an automatic barrier with a "vehicle registration reader" that scans a car's registration and then lets the car in.

She has a monthly pass (that comes out of her wages) which she has to put on view (place on the dashboard etc).

One day the pass had fallen onto the floor of the car.

a "parking attendant" i presume must have looked at the car and didn't see a pass and therefore gave a PCN.

My wife immediately contacted UKPC with photo proof of the pass, UKPC replied that they would reduce the charge but will still expect a small charge/fee "as a gesture of goodwill"...

There is an option of going to POPLA but then if the appeal is lost the full charge/fee is re-instated

Now according to my wife, when something like this happens to other NHS staff they just pay the "goodwill fee" as they don't need the hassle!! and have a good moan about it during their breaks.

I want to fight this by going through POPLA as i can't get my head around the fact that even though car registrations are saved on a database in order to gain entry to the carpark plus the "pass" comes out of payroll, surly UKPC just needs to cross reference the car registration database to determine if a car is illegally parked or not (obviously they are a money making operation and i wouldn't expect them to go out of their way to lose out on free money, but still!!)

Is it worth appealing out of principle or should i just accept it like my wife and her colleagues seem to have over the past years.

KeithP

Have your wife or their colleagues thought about complaining to their employer?

Is there perhaps a 'facilities management' function at the hospital that covers this?

Quentin

How much are we talking about?

Ubees

KeithP wrote: »

Have your wife or their colleagues thought about complaining to their employer?

Is there perhaps a 'facilities management' function at the hospital that covers this?

She has complained to management but the standard reply is that it's a private carpark therefore "its not much they can do".

KeithP

Perhaps the hospital needs reminding about The NHS patient, visitor and staff car parking principles.

Particularly this point:

Contracted-out car parking

NHS organisations are responsible for the actions of private contractors who run car parks on their behalf.

Ubees

Quentin wrote: »

How much are we talking about?

PCN is £100

"goodwill gesture" is £15


Granted in the grand scheme of things £15 is nothing, which explains probably why my wife & her colleagues just accept it and focus on more pressing issues that they have to face on a daily basis.

But for me it just feels creepy/slimy that UKPC can make it look like they are doing everyone a favour, when a simple check of a database that UKPC may even own, could avoid a PCN.

onlyfoolsandparking

My opinion (for what its worth) are these options,


A, Fight it all the way which will mean a BIG effort, lots of paperwork, time consuming, sometimes worrying and no guarantee of correct result (paying a big fat ZERO) I say correct result because at the very least its morally disgraceful.


B, pay the £15, NO BIG effort, no paperwork, not time consuming, no worrying and an absolute guarantee of no court action.


C, Pay the £15 'Without prejudice' so if at a later date (if the trust get their act together) parking practice changes you could potentially claim it back.


Of course you have to be aware (and from your post I think you are) that these PPC,s are as you put it "creepy/slimy", they have no morals and do not care one bit who they affect as long as they get the money.


I bet if any one of them needed urgent treatment they wouldn't dare mention what job they do or who they work for, hypocrisy at its finest.

Redx

Ubees wrote: »

She has complained to management but the standard reply is that it's a private carpark therefore "its not much they can do".

the question is , who owns said car park and also therefore ,WHO has the contract with UKPC ?


if the trust owns the car park and if the trust employed the PPC, then those NHS principles bind them and they would be jointly and severally liable , plus if they contracted UKPC they should have a way to cancel the charges


they should also have a way to add the VRM details to a "whitelist" of people who pay


but bear in mind that under the GDPR, the NHS cannot just share those details with anyone without their consent, meraning they may not have told UKPC which vehicles are in any whitelist

Guys_Dad

You will lose at POPLA who will state that you did not follow t&c and display your pass.

You can't hide driver as only you have right to park there, not anyone else driving your car.

bargepole

Ubees wrote: »

Is it worth appealing out of principle or should i just accept it like my wife and her colleagues seem to have over the past years.

If, as seems likely, the appeal is rejected by POPLA, my choice would be to do nothing, and wait for UKPC to issue a court claim.

I would then defend the claim, on the following grounds:

1. The contract for parking is formed between the NHS Trust, and the employee. Consideration flows both ways between the parties, in the form of salary deduction from the employee, and access to the staff parking area by the Trust.

2. The automatic system which raises the barrier upon recognition of a valid number plate is evidence of performance of the contract, by conduct.

3. No third party (UKPC) has any rights under that contract, and the purported terms and conditions displayed on their signage are not capable of varying the terms of the contract.

4. The purported requirement to display a permit is both unnecessary, and unenforceable as a contractual term. The fact that a vehicle is in the car park means that, by definition, it is authorised to be there, and the driver has complied with the terms of contract between him/herself, and the Trust.

5. For the reasons stated above, UKPC has no locus to litigate in the matter, and the Court is invited to dismiss the claim.

Ralph-y

a good one to get your MP involved ?


Ralph:cool: