hospital pcn appeal help

Redx

The EA2010 is what protects this person across the country, including in a hospital which is a service provider

people who are protected by the EA2010 do not get a Blue Badge as a form of entry membership card, some do not even qualify for a BB but are still protected by the law, this law trumps the other ones if used

the fact that an occupant of the vehicle is protected by the EA2010 and has a BB to show proof AS WELL is enough for the trust and their contractor to cancel the pcn (whether the attendant saw any BB is irrelevant once proof is produced)

it may be the case that an attendant or employee did not see the BB for some reason and issued a pcn, that isnt the real issue here

the real issue is that once the keeper brings this fact to the attention of the trust and the parking company, a cancellation should happen because it is in nobodys interest to take this to a fight in court

therefore, if the keeper tells the parking company at first appeal stage, or before said parking company has splashed out the cash on a court case, they should cancel

my own opinion is that people who qualify under the EA2010 and possibly who hold a BB as well, should be able to complain to an entity that their rights have been violated (like racism or similar) and that this legal body or onbudsman or whoever takes up the fight and if necessary takes the offender to court on behalf of the disabled person (not leaving it all to the disabled person to do)

so a bit like a regulator or onbudsman or like the ICO or similar

companies wont do something about it until strong measures are in place and they decide that compliance instead of offensiveness is required, usually for financial reasons (because they wont care about compassionate reasons)

Fruitcake

ToxicWomble wrote: »

My point was towards tho post that suggested claiming harassment of a disabled driver as a course of action.

If the fact that the driver is disabled isn’t apparent by any means (in this case absence of a BB) then claiming harassment against this characteristic is ludicrous at best.

I am sure the BB booklet you “quote” also states that a valid BB MUST be displayed clearly at all times

In this case it wasn’t. If as you say disabled parking spaces/BB aren’t applicable on private land then this whole defence point is invalid anyway

You can’t have it both ways

On a public road, yes. On private land, no.

As I already explained, the BB scheme is not applicable in this instance because it is private land, therefore there is no requirement to display one.
A motorist might decide to display a badge out of curtesy if they have one, but it is not mandatory.

Also, disabled motorists without a badge cannot possibly display one, but they still have the right to park in a disabled bay.

From the BB booklet/gov website,

"The badge is intended for on-street parking only."

"It’s a criminal offence to misuse a badge."

Using a badge for off-street parking could theoretically be construed as misuse which is a criminal offence.

As for harassment, once the scammers know the motorist is disabled, then the harassment angle may become valid.

Coupon-mad

I am sure the BB booklet you “quote” also states that a valid BB MUST be displayed clearly at all times

In this case it wasn’t.

Why are you quoting the BB book that only relates to council streets?

Half_way

The simple solution would be to inform the parking company:
An occupant of the vehicle has a disability (protected characteristic) as covered by the equality act....
You could add a beef description, ie mobility issues, needs extra time, extra space add so on better finishing with .....


therefore this parking charge must now be cancelled in order to prevent a breach of the equality act, I/we look forward to hearing from you to confirm this matter has been satisfactorily concluded.

Coupon-mad

Yes it is vital to do that, and keep proof (free certificate of posting, or copy email).

That then means the PPC can't later be heard to say they didn't know about it.