Parking Charge Notice issued even when permit is displayed

ianwordsworth

Hi all
I was issued a Parking Charge Notice (not a Penalty Charge Notice) from a private company, CPM who manage my residence's parking, on 24 Dec 2019 (yes... Christmas eve...). I had my permit displayed in the small window next to the driverside wing mirror at the time, where it's been displayed (30cm from the windscreen) for the 1,362 days since I moved in till the day in question. I'd never read the signage at the property up until getting the fine, which states that the permit should be displayed in/on the windscreen. [Edit: I was parking in my own parking space]
I've contested the charge through CPM's online appeal for which I never received confirmation until I received a letter stating that the charge was now £100 instead of the original £60. I again appealed through CPM's online appeal process and this was refused on the grounds that the permit needs to be displayed in/on the windscreen. I've since appealed through IAS (Independent Appeals Service) stating much the same as this.
Is there any government law that states that permits need to be displayed in/on the car windscreen (I couldn't find any)? Do these rules created by parking companies have any legal merit?
I have video footage taken 30 minutes after the charge was issued showing my permit on display and one the photos that the CPM operative took, although not clearly, shows the permit in the window.
Has anyone had a similar experience? I'm resolute in contesting this charge as my permit was and has always been on display.

D_P_Dance

Please read this

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.html

What does the lease/AST say about parking? Does it mention the need to display a permit? If not then it may take primacy over the self serving TnC of the scammer, and interfere with your lawful right to “quiet enjoyment” of your property, possible an offence under The Landlord and Tenants Acts.

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP., it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and in some cases, cancellation. 

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.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

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

ianwordsworth

Hi DPD
The rental agreement doesn't mention displaying the parking permit but having received one on taking up residency, I obviously found it prudent to display it. In the driverside wing mirror window; because it seemed like a good place to display it as the window doesn't freeze over as badly as the windscreen. That's my reasoning.

Le_Kirk

.............. and it doesn't obscure the windscreen whilst driving, which is an offence (albeit you would have to have a really large permit to obscure it to the extent of getting booked for it)!  Tell the PPC to go away and leave you alone and if they don't you will see them in court and let a judge decide!

ianwordsworth

Thanks for your responses. I've stated my facts but please could someone help me with the following questions: 
Is there any government law that states that permits need to be displayed in/on the car windscreen (I couldn't find any)? This is definitely what I'm contesting...
Do these rules created by parking companies have any legal merit?
Thanks.

KeithP

To answer your questions... No and no.
The private parking companies make up their own rules. They will allege that the driver broke the terms and conditions agreed at the time of parking.

Half_way

If the rental agreement doesnt mention displaying a permit, and it is your space then why are you meekly complying? - unless you agree to pay the scumbags £100/wahtever.

You should be getting in touch with the management company ASAP, you need to tell them, that your lease/rental makes no requirement to display a permit for the space that you are entitled to use no more than you would have to have a permit to flush your lavatory after 10pm.

 You also need to state that one of the reasons for moving in to that area was the inclusion of an unconditional parking space, and you have been/are only displaying a permit as a courtesy to who ever patrols the estate , a courtesy which you may chose not to carry out in the future at your own discretion (this is important as if you dont state that fact some PPCs have said it means you agree to pay them £100 each time the permit isnt what they deem to be visible - which is quite frankly ridiculous)

You should also tell the management company that the sub-letting of residents own parking spaces to an unregulated parking company is completely unreasonable and that the British Parking Association limited's POPLA scheme is entirely funded by the private parking industry operating to rules drawn up by the same industry ( BPA ltd Code of practice) as is the IPC ( international Parking community)  with he added bonus that the same people who run the IPC, also run the so called independent appeals service, and the solicitor company they use to aggressively pursue people.

 The uinreasonable bit should eb added as some management companies  have an opt out allowing them to carry out reasonable acts to ensure the smooth running of an estate

 

ianwordsworth

UPDATE: I've appealed the PCN through IAS and the appeal has been dismissed yesterday.  This is the adjudicator's response (TL;DR; in bold):

"It is important that the Appellant understands that the adjudicator is not in a position to give his legal advice. The adjudicator's role is to look at whether the parking charge has a basis in law and was properly issued in the circumstances of each particular case. The adjudicator's decision is not legally binding on the Appellant (it is intended to be a guide) and they are free to obtain independent legal advice if they so wish. However, the adjudicator is legally qualified (a barrister or solicitor) and decides the appeal according to their understanding of the law and legal principles.

The terms of this appeal are that I am only allowed to consider the charge being appealed and not the circumstances of other drivers or other parking events. The guidance to this appeal also makes it clear that I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances.

For the avoidance of doubt, this charge has been issued on the basis that no valid permit was clearly displayed in the vehicle at the time of the parking event. I am presented with photographic evidence from the Operator that no valid permit was on display at the time the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was issued. The signage throughout the site makes it clear that the restrictions apply to all vehicles parked at this site and that if vehicles park otherwise than in accordance with the terms a charge will be payable. I am satisfied that there is no evidence of a valid permit correctly displayed in the windscreen of the vehicle as required by the contractual signage.

Whether a driver feels that they have permission to park or not, the contractual terms require a driver to properly display a valid permit and by not displaying properly any such permit they agree to pay the charge. The Appellant should have ensured that a valid permit was clearly displayed in the vehicle otherwise they should have parked elsewhere.

It is the driver's (rather than a third party's) responsibility to ensure that the terms and conditions of parking are complied with. The vehicle was secure, stationary and unoccupied with no valid permit correctly on display and therefore, in accordance with the advertised terms, the driver is liable to pay a charge. The signage on site complies with current regulations and is sufficient to have brought the terms of parking to the driver's attention. The signage is neither misleading nor unclear. The contractual terms require the driver to display a valid permit, otherwise by parking they agree to pay the charge. If for any reason the driver cannot display a valid permit they can either park elsewhere, or remain parked and agree to pay the charge. The Appellant chose the latter option.

I am satisfied that the Operator has proven their prima facie case. Whilst having some sympathy with the Appellant's circumstances, once liability has been established, only the Operator has the discretion to vary or cancel the parking charge based on mitigating circumstances. Accordingly this appeal is dismissed."

Here's a link to the photos I submitted as evidence for the appeal: !!!!!!/3ccBWnX . As mentioned, I submitted a video showing the permit which has since been viewed several times.

So, what's my next move? Dig my heels in and wait for the debt recovery letters to arrive? Are there any other avenues to explore? So what are the chances of this progressing to court and chances of winning? I'm not about to hand over £100 when my permit was on display. 

Thanks for reading!

DoaM

And this surprises you how exactly? An IAS appeal had a 99%+ probability of failing.

All you do now (apart from what @Half_way suggested) is sit back and wait to see if you get a court claim.

D_P_Dance

I am bound by the law of contract and can only consider legal challenges not mistakes or extenuating circumstances.

So, if a scammer makes a mistake the alleged barrister/solicitor must ignore it? 

Fruitcake

You were advised not to appeal to the IAS kangaroo court and would have better spent your time on complaining to the MA and your MP about this unregulated scam.
How far have you got with those?