One Stop Shop, Perry Barr (Park Watch): Not Parked Wholly Within Bay

mar_uk

Bit annoyed and disappointed to receive an unexpected ticket from Park Watch (BPA) for something silly.
Have checked newbie sections and complained to One Stop Shop, but they uphold Park Watch by ignoring most of my points! No one from the Landlord company (Europa Capital, Sovereign or Lambert) bothered to reply in any case. Don’t think they have any complaint procedures.

Just need clarification, it was an windscreen ticket, so best that I should wait few days for expected ‘NTC’ and then appeal on 26 days as below with a modified address slightly, most likely will be rejected by them. The lady who replied to my complaint seemed to be working for Park Watch. Not fully understating the implication - so this would be the strongest point of winning - they NOT serving me NTC by post or served late or with wrong details (if they don't contact DVLA)?

This is what I have come out with (draft) so far reviewing few posts:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sir/Madam,
Ticket number:
Vehicle registration number:
You issued a parking ticket and attached it on my car on 05/07/2020, but I feel it was unlawful, unreasonable and unfair. Therefore, I kindly request that you waive this charged for the following reasons:
(1) There was insufficient signage
The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces/entrances and there is insufficient notice of the restrictions/sum of the parking charge itself. There was no signage through the entrance that that the vehicle has entered the car park and there was no signage where it was parked. Further, even where sign may exists, I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers.
(1a) The parking is free in the shopping centre and does not require permit - so no such restrictions are communicated via ‘permit’ as mentioned on the notice.
(2) The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The amount that have been charged is not based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner, especially when it has not caused any issues with the others including shoppers – in fact, more space for shoppers to move with their trolleys
There were plenty of empty parking space around where the vehicle has been parked at the time as seen in the picture 2 below and when vehicle left. This seems to be less busy area and has not caused any inconveniences, let alone any loss. In fact, they made as the driver have shopped there.
(3) Mitigating circumstances
I believe the reason for parking the way at the space was because of the trolley bay was on the right side of it – to avoid any potential damage to the car, as it happened before to the driver, and there may have been trolleys on the parking bay next to the shopping trolley bay, LIKE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE, AS SEEN ON THE PICTURE TAKEN AT THE TIME, that may have contributed to the decision making process. It further allows better movement of shoppers without damaging any vehicle. I feel the parking attendant have been over zealous in issuing the charge and therefore very unfair.
(3a) The driver have moved recently to Birmingham and unaware of such restrictions. Now that that has been known, the driver will not park in this manner, even if it means risking damage to the vehicle and/or inconveniences shoppers’ movements.

I trust that you will give reasonable consideration to the above by acknowledging them and cancel this charge forthwith rather than drag this matter any further. However, please be aware that I am entirely prepared to take this further, as I feel the charge is wholly unlawful, unreasonable and unfair. This includes complaining to the landowner about the matter if it is not cancelled.
In the event that you do decide not to waive the charge, treat this as a formal request for the following to be sent to me as soon as possible:
Further, I understand you do not own the car park and you have given me no information about your policy with the landowner or on-site businesses, to cancel such a charge. So please supply that policy as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. You have omitted clear information about the process for complaints including a geographical address of the landowner.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coupon-mad

Just need clarification, it was an windscreen ticket, so best that I should wait few days for expected ‘NTC’ and then appeal on 26 days

No, you don't wait for a NTK, you must appeal within 26 days of this windscreen PCN, as keeper.

D_P_Dance

 as I feel the charge is wholly unlawful, unreasonable and unfair. 

It is certainly unfair and unreasonable, and  only lawful if a judge says so.
 
IMO if this goes to court, a judge is likely to find for the defendant.  In many cases, one has no alternative but to park thusly if the car on either side has done so.  Please read this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis#:~:text=De%20minimis%20is%20a%20Latin,refuses%20to%20consider%20trifling%20matters.

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP., it can cause the scammer extra costs, 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 later this year,

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

i 

Umkomaas

Dump that draft - sorry, but it's awful - and just use the blue text initial appeal template from the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, first post. Send it to arrive by day 26 - preferably do it online, but check carefully any instructions about how to submit as shown on the ticket you have. 

Coupon-mad

Where did you find this 5 year old nonsense?

(2) The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss

mar_uk

Thanks everyone, didn't get any notifications so didn't check,

I simply copied from various posts tbh including https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5549361/popla-appeal-not-parked-wholly-within-bay

I will appeal on 25th via email.

(1) "The law does not concern itself with trifles"' - certainly applies here so shall I raise this on my appeal? This is what I was trying to say on (3) Mitigating circumstance.

(2) Do they need to send an NTK as per law? If they do and it has wrong details like name/address, will it help my case?

(3) So do I send just the template considering One Stop Shop already sent me pictures (I can ask for signage photo through the entrance or shall I just leave those arguments during next stage?  Can I speak on behalf of the driver :-)?

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

Umkomaas

So I just send this as my appeal?

No!  The thread you have used is from 2016, and much has moved on since then. The correct template to use is in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, first post - as I've already advised you previously.  Beware any drop down box on their website that traps you into stating you were the driver. 

Fruitcake

Complain to the BPA that the NTD states the name and address of the driver must be given. They are not allowed to say that. Include a copy of the NTD, but send it from the keeper.

Then, read the sticky thread for NEWBIES that asks everyone to read it first, put a note in your diary, and send the appeal template in blue from the NEWBIES, unaltered, from The Keeper, to arrive around day 26.

To find the Newbies (that was just underneath where you clicked on the  button), click on the link at the top of this page.



The thread you want looks like this.

mar_uk

Fruitcake - 'Complain to the BPA that the NTD states the name and address of the driver must be given.' Thanks for that. But I guess this comes after the appeal? At work now - will compose properly, here is my revised appeal letter based on all responses so far (thank you), to be sent via email as stated on the ticket on 25th Day (30th July):

You issued a parking ticket and attached it on my car on 05/07/2020.

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner, my local MP and warn others of such behaviour, in the event that you decide not to waive the charge. Also, I will complain to the BPA that the windscreen charge notice states that the name and address of the driver must be given, which you are not allowed to say that.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence, especially when I believe in the principal of ‘"The law does not concern itself with trifles" truly applies here. Therefore, you must include a CLOSE-UP ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle including:

-          Prominent, clear & legible signage through where the driver entered the car park, as it  has several entrances, and it is free parking, so realistically no one would check small prints that may potentially exist, and of course, so no such restrictions are communicated via ‘permit’ as mentioned on the windscreen ticket.

-          All sides where the vehicle was allegedly parked at the time (opposite, left & right). This should show any potential obstructions or other concerns that may have contributed to the decision-making process of parking like a Trolly Bay or Trolleys. Also, determine whether the amount that have been charged is based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner.

Further, I understand you do not own the car park and you have given me no information about your policy with the landowner or on-site businesses, to cancel such a charge. So please supply that policy as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. You have omitted clear information about the process for complaints including a geographical address of the landowner.

Umkomaas

You can send your complaint to the BPA right away, no need to wait for the initial appeal to be sent (or its result to be received). 

Why have you written an appeal different to that advised to all posters - as per the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, first post?

KeithP

mar_uk said:

I simply copied from various posts tbh including https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5549361/popla-appeal-not-parked-wholly-within-bay

It even says in that thread you copied from...

That said, now throw that outdated POPLA appeal in the bin and start again. Honestly, you have read OLD ones and cannot argue 'no loss' in 2016.