CPP PCN Hospital Overstay

champion99

Hi All,


We recently received a PCN for an overstay by 20 minutes at the hospital car park. The hospital car park you enter your ticket into the machine in the hospital, it calculates the amount to pay, you pay the amount and leave.


The machine informed us to pay for 1 hour which we did and the exit camera shows us leaving around roughly 1 hour 20 minutes later. This was due to us leaving the payment machine, arriving to parked car and needing to feed the baby.


We received the PCN through the post and I contacted the hospital who have been a massive waste of time. I receive an email stating they will pass my details onto the relevant department, they asked for proof and then I heard nothing.
I then have contacted them again on 3 further occasions where they do no respond to anything I state in the e-mail, just that they will forward my email on to the relevant department.


I then received another letter from the PCN company stating that the fine had risen to £100 so I used the template on this forum to appeal. I also attached a screenshot of the payment we made (not declaring who the driver was).


Today I received an email response stating that my appeal with the company has been rejected and that I should pay. Or that I could appeal with POPLA. I also received a POPLA reference.


Please can someone advise on my next steps?

Coupon-mad

Please can someone advise on my next steps?

Errrm...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76425634#Comment_76425634

POPLA is the thing to do and the NEWBIES thread covers it so not sure what you need to know that's not in the sticky thread? No link given...we never do.

Redx

It did not rise to £100 , it was discounted from £100 to £60 for early payment

The signs onsite will state the £100 figure

PALS should have dealt with you properly

Read post #3 of the newbies faq sticky thread near the top of the forum and construct a Popla appeal and post it below

champion99

Hi All,

Just after some advice on what to add to my POPLA appeal. As mentioned in the original post, when leaving University Hospital Coventry, we entered our car registration into the parking machine which determined that we should pay for 1 hour of parking. We paid this, made the walk to the car, packed up the buggy and gave the baby some snacks and drove off. I plan to send the below to the POPLA appeal but not sure what else to add.


Dear Sir/Madam,

POPLA Code

We are appealing the fine received on the 8th September 2019 at the University Hospital Coventry.

We deny liability for this claim as we paid the parking amount requested by the parking machine which determines when we entered the car park, how long we had stayed for and therefore calculates how much we should pay.

We paid the amount determined by the parking machine and have evidence of the payment made from our bank account. Therefore we do not understand why we are receiving this fine when we paid the amount requested by the machine.

KeithP

champion99 wrote: »

Just after some advice on what to add to my POPLA appeal.

Redx has already given you some good advice on that...

Redx wrote: »

Read post #3 of the newbies faq sticky thread near the top of the forum...

You don't appear to have done that.

The_Deep

Have you read this

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

Has the parking parasite fully complied?

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]t is not a fine, it is an invoice from an ex- clamper for damages for the harm they allege they suffered when you did what you did. We call it a scam. Pay them not one penny unless a judge so orders it.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

Did you miss my reply, it as intended to show you EXACTLY what to put:

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Errrm...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76425634#Comment_76425634

POPLA is the thing to do and the NEWBIES thread covers it so not sure what you need to know that's not in the sticky thread? No link given...we never do.

MistyZ

Forget about feeding the baby, that won't help with POPLA.

However, hospital car parks are often very busy and quite confusing. So if possible check out the signage in person or by using Google Streetview. Get photos or screenshots to embed in the appeal showing any / all ways in which signage is lacking.

20 minutes overstay is covered by the British Parking Association's Code of Practice. Google that and check out what that says about grace periods prior to parking and when parking has ended. Then do a search for 'Grace Periods 2 parts' on here till you find Coupon-mad's recent advice about separating the grace periods section in POPLA appeals into 2 distinct parts. And find a recent, successful POPLA appeal that does just that.

I suspect Grace Periods will be your leading section. Unless you reflect on the signage / placing of machines etc. and decide that is the key issue.

Then bung in all the standard POPLA sections as per Newbies' thread.

champion99

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Did you miss my reply, it as intended to show you EXACTLY what to put:

This link is to a "Parking ticket fine - Tesco PPS" I don't think you meant this link as it doesn't show what to write at all. I am now on a laptop looking at the Newbies sections which has a lot of excellent information.

MistyZ

champion99 wrote: »

This link is to a "Parking ticket fine - Tesco PPS" I don't think you meant this link as it doesn't show what to write at all. I am now on a laptop looking at the Newbies sections which has a lot of excellent information.

The link goes to a post within a thread and that post is all about self-help, starting with the Newbies' thread.

Now that you're getting to grips with the Newbies' thread, you probably appreciate how digesting that information in your own way and in you own time really sets you up for fighting back. Having 'taken ownership' it's then easier to understand the terms used etc. if more advice is required.

champion99

POPLA Verification Code:
Vehicle Registration

I, the registered keeper of this vehicle, received a letter acting as a notice to the registered keeper.

My appeal to the Operator, Car Parking Partnership – was submitted and acknowledged by the Operator and rejected via an e-mail letter dated 28 October 2019.

I deny liability for this claim as I was not the driver. I also deny liability for this claim as I have been informed that the parking amount requested by the parking machine when leaving the hospital was paid. The parking machine determines when the car entered the car park, how long the car was there for and therefore calculates how much should be paid. This amount requested by the parking machine was paid and a copy of the bank statement showing the payment has been provided.


As the keeper of this vehicle I contend that I am not liable for the alleged parking charge and wish to appeal against it on the following grounds:

1 Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice – Non-Compliance.

2 No Evidence of Period Parked – NtK does not meet PoFA 2012 requirements.

3 The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge.

4 No Evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice.

5. The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself

1. Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice – non-compliance

The BPA’s Code of Practice (13) states that there are two graceperiods: one at the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) states that:
“Your approach to parking management must allow a driver who enters your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.2) states that:
“You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.4) states that:
“You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (18.5) states that:
“If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.”

The BPA Code of Practice (13.4) clearly states that the Grace Period to leave the car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. It is reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace period stipulated in 13.4 is also a “reasonable grace period” to apply to 13.1 and 13.2 of the BPA’s Code of Practice.!

Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking Association (BPA):

“The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket. No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”

Finally, the minutes of the Professional Development & Standards Board meeting of 30/07/2015 show that it was formally agreed by the Board (of BPA members and stakeholders) that the minimum grace period would be changed in 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice to read 'a minimum of eleven minutes':

“Implications of the 10 minute grace period were discussed and the Board agreed with suggestion by AH that the clause should comply with DfT guidelines in the English book of by-laws to encourage a single standard. Board agreed that as the guidelines state that graceperiods need to exceed 10 minutes clause 13.4 should be amended to reflect a mandatory 11 minute graceperiod.”

The recommendation reads:“Reword Clause 13.4 to ‘If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 11 minutes.”

This shows that the intention of stating vaguely: 'a minimum of ten minutes' in the current BPA CoP (not a maximum -a minimum requirement) means to any reasonable interpretation that seconds are de minimis and therefore not taken into account.

If the BPA feel “a minimum of 11 minutes” is a reasonable time period to leave a car park after a period of parking, it stands to reason that at least the same period of time is reasonable to also enter a car park, locate (and read) terms and conditions, decide not to enter into a contract and then leave the car park.



It is therefore argued that Car Parking Partnership have FAILED to adhere to the BPA Code of Practise in that the duration of the alleged overstay in question (which Car Parking Partnership claim) is not an unreasonable grace period, given:

a) The ANPR records the “arrival time” at the point when the vehicle is alleged to be entering the car park and does not show if the car park is busy. While waiting for others to park this would reasonably cause the driver to spend several minutes finding a suitable parking space before parking the car, locating the signs, reading and attempting to understand them, checking the payment methods that can be used, ensuring correct coins and obtaining a ticket – hence the need for a reasonable grace period to be also applied at the START of parking.

b) The time record created by the ANPR at the “departure time” is allegedly at the exit. It does not therefore give any reasonable allowance for time taken to exit the parking space and reach the exit. This is clearly a variable that depends on other activity within the car park (people parking, queueing at the exit, distance of the payment machine inside the hospital and the distance to walk to the parked vehicle). Nor does it clearly show nor make allowance for how long it takes to exit onto the road should there be cars and pedestrians passing the exit. The system clearly makes no reasonable allowance for this and therefore no grace period has been allowed.


c) The lengthiness of Car Parking Partnerships signage (in terms of word count) with a significant amount of text included in a “conditions” section in tiny text at the bottom of the sign would in itself take many minutes to decipher given the height at which they are placed and the miniture size of a significant proportion of the text.

All factors discussed above serve merely to increase the time taken to: • Locate a sign containing the terms and conditions. • Read the full terms and conditions. • Decipher the confusing information being presented • Decide whether to park or not• Return to car to obtain correct coinage and return to obtain ticket and later to safely leave the car park.

Even with no mitigating circumstances the alleged overstay is within the revised graceperiod agreed by the BPA to be allowed at the END of parking. Taking into account that there is also a reasonable expectation of a similar grace period at the START of parking then clearly the vehicle cannot be shown to have been “parked” for longer than permitted.








2. No Evidence of Period Parked – NtK does not meet PoFA 2012 requirements

Contrary to the mandatory provisions of the BPA Code of Practice, there is no record to show that the vehicle was parked.

Furthermore, PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 paragraph 9 refers at numerous times to the “period of parking”. Most notably, paragraph 9(2)(a) requires the NtK to:

“specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;”

Car Parking Partnership simply claims that the vehicle “entered University Hospital Coventry -Patient & Visitor Car Park 8 & 9 Car Park at 17.52 and departed at 19:14”. At no stage Car Parking Partnership explicitly specify the “period of parking to which the notice relates”, as required by PoFA 2012.

Car Parking Partnership “are clearly using ANPR images to calculate the length of stay”. It is not in the gift of Car Parking Partnership to substitute “arrival and departure” or “time in car park” in place of the POFA requirement - “period of parking” - and hold the keeper liable as a result.

By virtue of the nature of an ANPR system recording only entry and exit times, Car Parking Partnership are not able to definitively state the period of parking. I require Car Parking Partnership to provide evidence to show the vehicle in question was parked on the date/time (for the duration claimed) and at the location stated.