Corporation Street Preston PCN - Photographic Evidence Unclear in Relation to Issue Reason 22

Southport_Dave

Had a PCN stuck on car by Care Parking at the Aldi Corporation Street site with reference to 'Issue Reason 22 - Abused Patron Parking. The ticket was issued within a few minutes of arriving and Care Parking Website photographs of car, four off all taken within 2 minutes of the PCN issue, show it is parked centrally within a none disabled bay.
The signage in the area has a 2 hour limit and states that drivers must not leave the local shops and car park.
Driver visited the local shops and bought some milk from Aldi.
Is it worth appealing as the Care Parking photographs appear to just show the car parked correctly in a bay within a few minutes of him arriving?

Coupon-mad

Not sure what else to say except this is no different than any other case and needs him to read the NEWBIES thread and send the forum template appeal as KEEPER (not driver) on DAY 26.

The reason for the delay is explained there. Diarise it, and he appeals online.

Easy as any other BPA one. The NEWBIES thread stops most threads like this, no need!

Southport_Dave

OK, I accept this may seem a 'standard case for appeal' but are Care Parking keeping something up their sleeve? The photographs they've put on their website prove nothing other than car was parked within a few minutes of the entrance camera logged as coming in and that the CPN was attached to windscreen. Car was correctly parked in a valid bay.
I was merely asking if anyone had an update on how an appeal against this type of PCN in this particular car park was likely to be successful as the conditions of parking on this site have changed in the last 12 - 18 months.
Is it not worth asking now what do they mean by 'Abused Patron Parking' ? Their response, if they bother to respond, may help determine the next step.

Coupon-mad

but are Care Parking keeping something up their sleeve?

No, what you are missing is what a keeper appellant has up their own sleeve by appealing with a template on day 26, and NOT saying or implying who was driving.

A keeper appellant has a trick or two they can then play, at POPLA stage, where the appeal can be more detailed, but still NO blabbing about what happened/who parked.

twhitehousescat

if you check the planning permission for the change of useage from a garage (dutton forshaw) to a supermarket and related shops back in 1999 , you will see planning permission was given on the proviso

1: parking for 204 cars

2: parking for 3 hours

3: parking on site that enables them to use other shops offsite

parking eye ran to the hills when I produced that document at POPLa several yrs ago

this doc can be found or copied at Preston councils offices

bellboy1972

I am in a similar position for this exact site, appealed using the standard letter not naming the driver and appeal was rejected saying I had not stated any grounds for appeal.

nosferatu1001

Yes, but you of course dont ask on here, as this is not your thread

OP - get editing, youve been told twice now.

Southport_Dave

OK, I respect that you are much more experienced and knowledgable at dealing with this kind of issue than me, but I think you should tone down your terminology ie "babbling!' as it is likely to draw offence.
I'm just keen to catch up as to how to appeal and out do these r****** b*****!. In addition to finding out the current rules for the parking site what I was trying to gain from my posting is an up to date picture of how the parking management firm will react, the steps involved and how and when I should react ie whats the next step after 26 days?
I would be interested to see your response to bellboys 1972's reply. OK, hold the reply to that, I've caught up with bellboy1972's thread ; Abused Patron Parking - Care parking Aldi Preston.
Why are some people so angry and sharp on these forums??

Southport_Dave

Thanks twhitehousescat.
Do you know if the three points regarding planning permission conditions for use of the site you state are still valid today? If you don't I will try to check at the council offices and post this back.

Southport_Dave

NOSFERATU1001 I have edited my posts however, I think your terminology could be toned down as well.

Coupon-mad

I think you should tone down your terminology ie "babbling!' as it is likely to draw offence.

We never say 'babbling'.

We warn people never to blab (i.e. blurt out, here or in an appeal) about who was driving.

how and when I should react ie whats the next step after 26 days?

The PPC has 35 days to respond with a POPLA code, which they cannot refuse to give, then the keeper wins at POPLA (2nd stage), due to the fact they didn't 'blab'!