Initial appeal Aintree University Hospital

Ralph-y

I would like to run this pass you all to see if I have got the right angle...


Driver goes to A&E parks in short stay car park outside A&E in disabled bay. Displays blue badge.


In A&E is taken in and keep it overnight for treatment and tests.


Driver informs staff about car , told they would let security know.


Following day driver finds 'breach of contract' notice on windscreen.


On day driver complains to PALS , security and general office, “go away and appeal” was only answer.


Now normally we/ I would say ' wait for NTK '


or even …....


he hospital trust does not belong to an ATA, so won't have electronic access to your details via the DVLA. ( I am sure now classed as old info)


The Hospital is Aintree University, who use Trethowans.


The only appeal is by letter to Car Parking Liverpool.


There is lots on this forum re this scamming honeypot … but all to do with defending claims.


And most several years old … again unless my searching is fubar


So my mind is leaning towards not using the newbie template as there would be no point … no POPLA appeal code will be forthcoming.


If opinion is OK on this then I will attempt to write an appeal


initial points to consider


1 frustration of contract, they keep the driver in the hospital and there was no way to pay


2 signs not clear. No normal P&D signs … there are signs, all other car parks in hospital do have regular P&D signs (driver is a regular visitor , but first time to this park) … this may not be of use any way if the Hospital appeals do not operate like POPLA


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]3 No keeper liability, including Notice to Keeper errors (PoFA 2012) again will this apply ? [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]4 The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge ......... as above.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Am I missing something ?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]With this not being a normal appeal to a PPC ( unless you tell me it is) whether to use more of 'the circumstances ' would be of use? Has any one heard of appeals to them in recent years ?[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]How did they play out ?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ralph:cool:
[/FONT]

waamo

I don't recall seeing one for a long time. Given there is no independent appeals here this is the one situation where mitigation may be more useful than legality.

It's essentially a bunch of hospital staff that decide the appeal. Stuff like keeper liability doesn't interest them and they don't understand it anyway.

A well crafted tug at heart strings may be more useful than the usual approach. Without giving away who was driving of course.

twhitehousescat

ok aintree , been discussed before

correct , they are not in an ATA , and probably do not have to comply with POPLa as such

seem to recall tregs used taxpayers money to chase a doctor all the way to scotland !

the parking is done in house and I think they go down the trespass route


you need to keep on at pals

Redx

TRETHOWANS usually apply for keeper details and send the NTK, meanwhile its keep on at PALS and quote the guidelines at them


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles

twhitehousescat

there were discussions about this last time , was the indo from the SVLA for parking or what?

Tregs are not in an ATA , and the laws (POFA2012) state that only ATA members can get info for PARKING offences

waamo

twhitehousescat wrote: »

there were discussions about this last time , was the indo from the SVLA for parking or what?

Tregs are not in an ATA , and the laws (POFA2012) state that only ATA members can get info for PARKING offences

ISTR they do go the trespass route. They don't use POFA and can't anyway so they need to chase the driver. If they RK wasn't the driver that would help immensely.

Redx

from what I remember, one person complained about TRETH issuing an NTK within 28 days after a windscreen ticket and were reported for it to the DVLA because they asked for the KEEPER details too early


https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5072425/parking-ticket-help



https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5437187/trethowans-court-claim-help-appreciated

twhitehousescat

for what , the OP was a "guest" of the site , and probably have full Documentation (and possably scars) to prove it

so in the words of inspector morse "where where you on the night of XX XX?

"I was in a bed with 20 doctors treating me , I was booked in at XX and released at XX

at the time the ticket was issued I have an alibi , take it up with the driver "

nigelbb

twhitehousescat wrote: »

Tregs are not in an ATA , and the laws (POFA2012) state that only ATA members can get info for PARKING offences

POFA 2012 says nothing of the sort. Section 4 of POFA is to do with the keeper being liable for unpaid parking charges incurred by the driver provided . There is no reference to ATAs. It's just the DVLA rules that only members of an ATA can purchase Registered Keeper details to pursue parking charges by way of a business.

Aintree Hospital are the landowner so are always permitted to purchase RK details of vehicles that have trespassed or whatever on their land e.g. if a car is dumped in your drive. Trethowans are lawyers acting for their client.

In this case I would submit an appeal exactly as requested & tell the story just as it happened. No need to muddy the waters with hiding the identity of the driver just play it absolutely straight.

I would be amazed given the circumstances if the charge isn't cancelled as there are so many reasons why a charge in this instance would be invalid & unacceptable. Arguments would include...

1) Not adhering to the NHS patient, visitor and staff car parking principles - "charges... should be waived when overstaying is beyond the driver’s control (eg when treatment takes longer than planned"
2) Frustration of contract
3) Promissory estoppel

Ralph-y

(posted after reading the above)



just checking re the driver / keeper ... I suspect they are the same ...


it seems strange that this site it had gone quiet here for a while ....



still not sure if the frustration of contract .... the driver was keep in over night ... might be a better angle than driver not known



all the other threads are a few years old ... and that makes me want to be careful as much may have / has changed.



14 days for a postal appeal ...


did think of starting this of with a ' my case is a bit different / not covered / unusual



Ralph:cool:

Umkomaas

still not sure if the frustration of contract

Depends what the 'contract' (signage) says.

It may be a case of Promissory Estoppel (a hospital representative provides permission to undertake an action):

Driver informs staff about car , told they would let security know

But they might not have been offering anything, rather they might have been reporting to security an errant vehicle that needed a penalty ticket attaching!

Would need to know precisely what was 'promised' by the staff and what they were asking of/reporting to security.