PCN from Premier Parking Solutions at Didcot Station - Company Car

wiz12345

Good morning all,
Yesterday, my vehicle was parked at Station Road cark park in Didcot, and upon return to the vehicle, a PCN from Premier Parking Solutions was attached to the windscreen, stating that my vehicle "exceeds marked bay area".

My vehicle (4.7m long) did slightly overhang the back line of the space (despite the wheels being inside the space) so that the front of my vehicle was inline with other parked vehicles and not protruding into the 'road'.

If the charge was more reasonable, I'd have accepted it, but at £100, they are taking the p***.

As a company car, I can't simply ignore it and wait for a NtK, so was thinking of appealing with something like this:

[FONT=&quot]Dear Sir/Madam,
I challenge this 'PCN' as lessee of the vehicle and subsequently request all future correspondence be sent directly to myself at the address listed below:

My address
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
In this instance, the registered keeper is not the "keeper" as defined under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012[/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot] (POFA)[/FONT].
I am the vehicle's hirer and keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definitions under Schedule 4 of POFA.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers. [/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]As such, I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Further, I understand you do not own the car park, yet you have given me no information about your policy with the landowner to cancel such a charge. So please supply that policy as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.

Yours faithfully,
My name[/FONT]

Any advice much appreciated

Redx

whilst it seems a reasonable attempt at an appeal by a lessee, please confirm that you have read the EDNA BASHER posts about this topic and that you have written the above appeal after studying the EDNA BASHER examples ?

see the bottom of post #1 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread where he waxes lyrical about it and is the acknowledged expert on hire vehicles on here

lastly, WHY are you quoting the BPA CoP when PPS is an IPC AOS member ?

Premier Parking Solutions Ltd

Accreditation Start Date: 01/03/2016


pps.uk.com

Coupon-mad

I think you've read old Didcot threads from back when PPS were in the BPA.

wiz12345

Thanks for the info on not being BPA I'll reword it accordingly.

Secondly, is there any point in trying to appeal it based on poor bay markings or that when paying by cash, the terms are next to the machine, but by RingGo, there are no terms given?

wiz12345

After a bit more reading, I am proposing the following challenge:

[FONT=&quot]I challenge the parking charge notification (PCN) for the alleged parking infringement on 6th October 2018 as lessee of the vehicle and subsequently request all future correspondence be sent directly to myself at the address listed below:

[/FONT]
Address
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In this instance, the registered keeper is not the "keeper" as defined under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA).
I am the vehicle's hirer and keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definitions under Schedule 4 of POFA. [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Although the PCN states the reason for issue as "exceeds marked bay area", it provides no evidence to support this claim. In the absence of any conclusive evidence in support of the alleged breach, I trust you will agree that it would be unreasonable for Premier Parking Solutions Ltd to expect me to pay this charge.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Furthermore, I believe that the signage provided at the site does not comply with the IPC code of practice, as the signage intended to form a contract is not “[/FONT][FONT=&quot]clearly legible and placed in such a position (or positions) such that a driver of a vehicle is able to see [the terms] clearly upon entering the site or parking a vehicle within the site”[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Finally, I understand you do not own the car park, yet you have given no information about your policy with the landowner to cancel such a charge. Please supply that policy as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response.

[/FONT]