Where are the Regs for Parking on Private Land ?

Fruitcake

Tarian wrote: »

Absent an answer to to the specific parking situation.....
It seems entirely reasonable to ask a general, but narrow question about signage.....
.....and the P of A making provision for the Regulation of signage.

How is anyone expected to know that since 2012, no such Regs have been made - without asking - and on a stand-alone thread - which some of us might search for ??

You have answered very clearly - in the negative - and that is very helpful - and may be appreciated by others searching for the topic of "Signage" and Regulation".

(While appreciating the efforts of regulars, it would also be appreciated if Newbies were not routinely "told off" - esp. as this Forum is a navigational "maze".
Surely our common enemy is these scam Parking Cos ? )

Of course it is reasonable to ask a general question here, but if it relates to a specific parking incident then it is entirely reasonable to expect that question to be asked where the information to which it relates can be found.

If you are more interested in getting an answer to your general question (which I believe has already been answered) then by all means continue on this thread.
If however you want help with your PCN, then you would be better concentrating on your other thread.

So often we get asked questions that we later find are irrelevant, or worse still, we provide answers that later turn out to be wrong because we didn't have the content to which it relates before hand. That is the risk you run by asking general questions without context.

In any case, there is a considerable amount of information available in the NEWBIES that already answers the vast proportion of questions we get asked by posters, and this forum has been around since before 2012.

We really don't have time to answer every single question we get asked.

Loadsofchildren123

If Signage Regs have not been so issued, does anyone know if Case Law (for parking on private land) supports the application of the Statutory Guidance for signage etc for parking on the public highway etc ?


No.
The operator is expected to abide by the rules and regs for signage set out in the relevant CoP
In reality, these are rather woolly.
You are unlikely to win if there were signs. I did argue the point and this is what I said:


The signage was cluttered, small, illegible to motorists and not prominently displayed, so any terms were not sufficiently brought to the driver’s attention. It is a requirement for signs to be clear and legible - see paragraph B18.3 of the CoP. The clarity of the signage was also a feature in Beavis (in that case, the Defendant was the driver and accepted that there was a contract formed by the signage, which was exceptionally clear and prominently displayed - the case was therefore concerned only with the issue of damages and not liability for breach of contract).

There was no adequate warning sign at the entrance to the Land which would draw drivers’ attention to the signage inside the Land. A clear sign at the entrance, referring to terms and conditions, is a specific and mandatory requirement of the BPA CoP which the Claimant was required to follow at the relevant time (B18.2 of the CoP). The only sign at the entrance states ........... [obviously only relevant if entry signage inadequate - eg did the sign refer to parking without a permit being prohibited, parking charges or reference to terms and conditions displayed inside the Land (which would warn drivers to look out for further signs]

The party making the offer must be clearly identified, but was not [may not apply to you]

The wording on the sign is forbidding. The only discernible offer it makes is to permit holders, it makes no offer to drivers without a valid permit [again, may not apply to you]

Where terms on a sign are not seen and the area is not clearly signed with prominent terms, the driver cannot have consented to an unknown contract, which in turn he/she cannot have breached – the contract is not capable of being established. In Vine v Waltham Forest [2000] EWCA Civ 106 the driver did not see the terms and consequently could not be deemed bound by them.

The defects in the signage set out above are all a breach of the BPA CoP. Compliance with the CoP is compulsory for members of its AOS (see paragraphs A2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 4.1, 4.2, 6.1 and 6.8 of the CoP). In this case, the Claimant has failed to comply with the CoP in several important respects [then you'd set out how and why the signs fail to comply, you'll see how I dealt with this above - in my case I didn't just argue breaches of the CoP in relation to the signs, but other breaches and tied this in with what was said in Beavis about compliance with the CoP]. The parking contract between landowner and PPC may also provide that the ppc MUST comply with the CoP and since it is that contract which they claim entitles them to issue and pursue pcns you may want to argue that too.

I think Lamilad relied on breaches of the CoP in one of his cases and the judge favoured the argument and on his recommendation I did a whole schedule of all the breaches showing they were multiple.

Obviously I've quoted here from the BPA CoP which might not apply in your case, but it gives you an idea. If BPA is the relevant CoP, please also note that my para refs may be wrong because I would have been relying on the CoP in place at the time of my pcn, and it may well be a different version to the one applicable to you.

Fruitcake

Loadsofchildren123 wrote: »

Obviously I've quoted here from the BPA CoP which might not apply in your case, but it gives you an idea. If BPA is the relevant CoP, please also note that my para refs may be wrong because I would have been relying on the CoP in place at the time of my pcn, and it may well be a different version to the one applicable to you.

Hence my comments about the OP posting a stand alone question about signage on a new thread instead of posting on their other thread detailing their PCN.