Private Land: Parked in a disabled bay (interesting story!)

The_Deep

By all means complain to the MA. However, ime they will no nothing, so send in your PoPLA appeal ASAP.

ImranBro

I probably should have started the the thread with all the details.

P4 Parking Signage
Bay that I parked in

Parking Charge Notice
Notice to Keeper
'Appeal' Reply Letter Page 1
Page 2
Evidence Page 1 (partial disable sign showing)
Evidence Page 2
Evidence Page 3
'Appeal' Letter final page

Any thoughts please before I start building my appeal with POPLA? Does it matter that the disabled sign can just about be seen?

Thanks,

Fruitcake

Inadequate Signage (PoFA and BPA CoP failure), BPA CoP breach (£25 add on), Not the landowner, no standing (no valid contract) to issue charges in their own name.

Signage includes ground markings, but disabled spaces must be identified by signs that can be seen from the driver's seat.

Complain to the BPA as advised.

Complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

ImranBro

Fruitcake wrote: »

No NTK (PoFA failure), Inadequate Signage (PoFA and BPA CoP failure), BPA CoP breach (£25 add on), Not the landowner, no standing (no valid contract) to issue charges in their own name.

Signage includes ground markings, but disabled spaces must be identified by signs that can be seen from the driver's seat. I wouldn't worry too much about that as the first point alone will win, assuming you never received an NTK. Even if the send one now it will be too late for keeper liability to apply as it is past day 56 for para 8 of the PoFA to apply.

Complain to the BPA as advised.

Complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

Sorry fruitcake. I forgot to add a link for the NTK. I have updated my original post. I've also added the terms as provided by P4Parking and the Bay in question.

These guys don't seem like cowboys to be honest. They seem pretty much on the ball.

Redx

I doubt that , I struggle to think of any ethical and honest private car parking companies , and I have been coming here and advising people for 6 or 7 years almost on a daily basis

Sometimes Parking Eye and Napier seem reasonable and don't have onerous charges or inflated court claims , comply with POFA etc

The rest are mainly cowboys that need a good slap and the sooner the Mhclg get off their backsides and issue a mandatory and clear CoP the better

Coupon-mad

There is no evidence that the car was in a properly marked and prominently designated disabled bay, as there are no hatched lines around that bay to set it apart from any other and if there was a wheelchair logo it's under any car that parks there and a driver would never know.

There is no disabled bay sign at all, that sets out any obligations (not even to display a Council Blue Badge, which cannot be assumed because on private land, the BB scheme is only relevant if an operator makes it clear that Blue Badges are required). There is nothing said about it at all at that bay.

The main sign sets out some terms but fails to mention disabled bays or Badges.

The PCN states a contravention of terms that don't exist and is not a breach: ''parked in a disabled bay''. Normally ths would say ''without displaying a Blue Badge'' but it doesn't, so what advertised term has the driver breached?

ImranBro

Hi All,

Struggling a little to put my appeal together and was wondering if you could have a read of what I've written so far (and maybe provide some helpful pointers). Having read a fair few appeals on this forum I still feel my arguments are a little weak and it doesn't read anywhere as professional as the others on the forum. I have tried to take as much from them but mine just seems very specific.

Also some guidance on point 4 please. I'm trying to argue £100 fine in itself is quite extortionate and in no way amounts to the cost to operate the parking.

Here's the link to the appeal letter which I plan to send across to POPLA.

https://1drv.ms/w/s!Akh06PgPxDZqlVa_V5q-1_l3G-e5

Thanks in advance.

Umkomaas

Also some guidance on point 4 please. I'm trying to argue £100 fine in itself is quite extortionate and in no way amounts to the cost to operate the parking.

Forget that. ParkingEye v Beavis put paid to it at the UK's highest court - The Supreme Court. No legs whatsoever.

Umkomaas

This is somewhat of a (very) long shot on my part. P4P do a lot of enforcement in Scotland. Can you please just confirm that this 'infringement' did not take place in Scotland?

ImranBro

Yes that is correct @Umkomaas. It did not take place in Scotland.