ParkingEye hospital PCN guessing for staff bay parking

Oiboy

We have received a reply from PALS.
They refused to take action in this matter. They fail to reflect upon the arguments provided such that there is lack of evidence showing the car situated in the wrong bay, quoting:
"... multi-storey car park at UHW is split into two separate sections - levels 1-3 are for ‘Patients/Visitors’ and levels 3a and above are for ‘Essential Staff’...All levels within the multi-storey car park are clearly identified by colour coded signage that distinguishes between ‘Patient/visitor’ (blue signage) and ‘Essential Staff’ (green signage) sections..."

Notice one says 1-3, the other 3a and above, contradiction or simply a typo?

Further they add: "... the information you provided it is evident that you parked in an Essential Staff car park which is why the charge..."

The PCN contained only entry and exit to the main car park nothing that would situate the car on any particular level. We claimed that we have never parked above the level 3. How is this evident for them, we wonder?

What do we do next?

Oiboy

Ralph-y wrote: »

have you done a SAR to parkinglie ?
as part of this
"It does not indicate clearly which rule was breached, thus our confusion."
ask them what the breach of contract was for.
Ralph:cool:

Yes we have done that. In summary asking for clear explanation of the reasons for the PCN and the evidence to that effect or cancellation of the PCN.

Redx

Well you could pay it in full and save the hassle

You can appeal it to PE and then to popla , hoping for a win on a technicality or legal submission

Or you can take your chances in court like this one who lost

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5926933/parking-eye-court-claim-form-please-help

Heath hospital featured on Parking Hell last week , where the lady who helped out in the Indigo debacle was featured helping others , maybe contact her for advice ?

Just make sure you understand the whole topic before diving into it , because Hurtbuyer didn't and he and his wife lost in Court recently

Cardiff is a graveyard for misguided people who haven't understood the topic , or the consequences

Oiboy

pogofish wrote: »

Post 1 2:2 of the Newbies Sticky covers your case completely....?

A strong complaint to PALS should be your first option. Search-out the NHS Parking Principles for why.

In some way it relates to it. Yes it says that PALS should have been contacted. Reading it originally we understood, incorrectly, that it was not applicable in our case.
As mentioned in other post we received a response, we think a hasted one, where they are refusing to assist.

Our case is different as according to them we parked in a staff bay where they have not produced evidence to that effect, where other cases found on forum usually refer to staff member parking in a visitor's bay.

The thread is also intended to gather answers to the questions (in the first post), as to the rules regarding the burden of evidence. We desire to understand if a black photo, made by a ANPR camera, is sufficient evidence for their claim.

Redx

It's sufficient of the time on site and the fact it's a black photo is not relevant , parking prankster posted a blog a few years ago on how anpr works , please read it

How they determine their claim depends on how they monitor each of those car parks, I assume each one has cameras , unless they have a CEO on foot patrol ?

If you had watched that TV programme like I did you would know that it's a confusing site with a lot of complaints , but the PE contract and signage is fairly new , probably last year once Indigo lost it

A popla appeal , or court case , should determine the definitive legal answer to your questions , but nobody here can do so

If the vehicle was in the incorrect car park , then maybe they have a permit system , or a whitelist of staff vehicles ?

It will all come out in the wash

Perhaps the lady from the TV programme may know ? She has posted on here with the Indigo saga in the past

The wife of Hurtbuyer was a staff member who should know about the parking regime , she lost in Court

Oiboy

Thank you for your time guys.
Regarding the parking site, we know that it is one entrance and we have not seen any other cameras about and there is no ticketing system. PALS reply says there should be signage upon entering a site for staff. The reply also indicates that only cameras are at the entry/exit.
We will revisit the site to take a closer look at it.

Then if they have a guy on patrol where is the photographic evidence situating the car in the wrong bay?
We want to establish if they even have to or what they currently show is sufficient.

nosferatu1001

SAR them. Then yuo know exactly what docuemtns they have or dont have.

waamo

Oiboy wrote: »

Thank you for your time guys.
Regarding the parking site, we know that it is one entrance and we have not seen any other cameras about and there is no ticketing system. PALS reply says there should be signage upon entering a site for staff. The reply also indicates that only cameras are at the entry/exit.
We will revisit the site to take a closer look at it.

Then if they have a guy on patrol where is the photographic evidence situating the car in the wrong bay?
We want to establish if they even have to or what they currently show is sufficient.

Only a judge can decide if their evidence is sufficient. It often is as it doesn't have to meet the criminal standards for burden of proof.

You could keep on at PALS explaining there were no signs and anything else that might help. As I said an emotional aspect can help, for example sick relative or the suchlike.

Coupon-mad

ParkingEye will NOT have anyone patrolling. Where is the evidence of parking in a staff bay? Ask PALS, reply an ask how they decided that ''... the information you provided it is evident that you parked in an Essential Staff car park..."

Oiboy

Coupon-mad wrote: »

ParkingEye will NOT have anyone patrolling. Where is the evidence of parking in a staff bay? Ask PALS, reply an ask how they decided that ''... the information you provided it is evident that you parked in an Essential Staff car park..."

That is a very good argument, thank you. We will take it forward.

We will revisit the site in order to establish presence of other cameras (on different levels), as how would they otherwise know that any breach has taken place, if not with help of a patrol man?