PCN breach of contract

Coffee_Please

Hi All

First Post, I've been lurking for some time and I thank you all for this invaluable resource. 

I'm currently at the Letter of Claim stage with BW Legal.

I've been researching, putting my defense together when I noticed an anomaly on the PCN. I haven't found any reference to this on the discussion board.

Namely, the PCN claims that the period of parking started at the time of the ANPR record, as the car entered the car park. The contract to which the driver allegedly agrees clearly states that the contract to park begins 5 minutes after entering the car park. The claim period on the PCN therefore doesn't not tally with the actual contractural period of parking.

What is the significance of this? Does it signify a breach of contract on behalf of the PPC? Does it invalidate the PCN? Or is it just another nail in coffin for BWLegal against an already robust defence? Thanks everyone.

D_P_Dance

Judges normally find that the period of parking begins when the motorist parks, not time spent looking for a place, read this

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html

Also read about grace period in the ATA's codes of practice, normally 10 minutes each in and out.

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 has been known to get the charge cancelled.

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.

Coffee_Please

Many thanks for your prompt response D_P_Dance. Much appreciated.

i agree entirely about the need to have time to park. However , the question here relates to the PPC ignoring the specific terms of the contract offered when producing a PCN.

If one party pick and choose which of the contractural terms they wish to honour or disregard, then surely that is a breach of contract?

1505grandad

Which PPC is it?

D_P_Dance

 then surely that is a breach of contract?

Only if a judge says so.  If the PPC is found  by the judge to have acted improperly then the case will be dealt with appropriately,  Up until the matter gets in front of a judge, how the PPC  behaves has little consequence.  You can always complain to their trade association.

Coffee_Please

1505grandad said:

Which PPC is it?

Premier Park

Coffee_Please

D_P_Dance said:

 then surely that is a breach of contract?

Only if a judge says so.  If the PPC is found  by the judge to have acted improperly then the case will be dealt with appropriately,  Up until the matter gets in front of a judge, how the PPC  behaves has little consequence.  You can always complain to their trade association.

Good idea. 👍 I'll write to BPA for clarification of the definition.

If the BPA determine the 'parking duration' is 'as defined in contract' (which logically it has to be, as any other time period is without the terms of the claim), rather than time on site, this would have implications for PPC reliance on POFA2012 to identify the driver as their 'notice to keeper' contained invalid information, yes?

Umkomaas

Don't expect the BPA to give any advice that might disadvantage their member. But their reply will be interesting. Keep us in the loop. 

Are you getting on with responding to the BWL LoC (using advice in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post?  Have you sent your SAR to Premier Park Ltd?

nosferatu1001

Teh BPA wont help
You just add it as a  point to the defence. Does this 5 minutes help you at all? If not, dont expect the corut to care. There is no "gotcha" here - if there is an overstay anyway. 

Coffee_Please

Umkomaas said:

Don't expect the BPA to give any advice that might disadvantage their member. But their reply will be interesting. Keep us in the loop. 

Are you getting on with responding to the BWL LoC (using advice in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, second post?  Have you sent your SAR to Premier Park Ltd?

SAR going out this morning.

I'm working on the defence side.

A little background on the case....

I was erroneously named as the driver by the Keeper (my employer) even though I was medically unfit to drive at the time and my car was used as a pool car. I am asured by the driver that parking was paid - they probably entered the wrong reg. The parking is barrierless, ticketless and relies wholly on the honesty of the PPC not to issue a PCN.

The machines are not linked to the ANPR and there is no check on site that a reg number entered corresponds to the cars in the car park. There is no consumer protection at all. I have photographic and video evidence of all of this.

The machines apparently do issue a reciept but this has not been retained (50p). The signage makes no reference to keep the reciept and implies it is not required for the parking contract.

On recieving the PCN I responded as not being the driver. As this would go back to my employer, I offered to pay the amount claimed (as a good will gesture, nothing more) on behalf of the driver, if the PPC could produce any evidence payment wasn't made - PDT printouts, video, photos - anything. They flatly refused to co-operate and escalated the case against me.

I have continued to respond to every subsequent claim, reaffirming that I am not the driver and that they have no contract with me. We currently stand at around £250 claim for a 50p alledged underpayment and LoC.

I can fully evidence my medical situation at the time of the parking. And of course, the templates offered by you guys are a great help. I'm looking to add any other spanner to the works if I can.

Noseratu1001

It helps me if it makes the POFA2012 reliance void. However, there is an issue of consumer protection here. I'm sure that getting the time wrong is an automated routine procedure and will affect everyone in a similar situation. If the PPC were claiming a 3 minute overstay it would obviously have serious implications.

nosferatu1001

So the 5 minutes doesnt help
You were not the keeper nor were you the driver, and you would lead with thes ein the defence. You must produce evidnece that you were not able to driver AND that this was now a POOL CAR - ie you were no longer the day to day keeper, you didnt have keys any longer
Then POFA is obviated; you are not liable at all, with or without POFA
As for the 5 minute making a differenc e- again, i doubt a court will give two hoots, frankly.