Latest advice for Scotland - Private Parking Charge

Fairwinds

When sending ( filling out on line) the appeal letter - do i remove this bit as it doesn't apply or leave in as part of th estandard appeal - seems a silly question - but you never know.
"If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it."
The allegation is not registering car number plate with the establishment and therefore being there without authority - even though our daughter was in said establishment and took 10 mins to come out ( the time the car was in the area), while driver waited.

Umkomaas

Fairwinds said:

When sending ( filling out on line) the appeal letter - do i remove this bit as it doesn't apply or leave in as part of th estandard appeal - seems a silly question - but you never know.
"If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it."

Why are you even bothering?  But if you're determined to poke a stick in the hornets' nest, leave it out. 

Coupon-mad

These things below are the only actions to take.  No appeal in Scotland, stay under the radar.

 Complain to the pub, but of course not giving away the driver's identity.

And secondly, you are about to get Keeper Liability next year (laws are not retrospective) in Scotland because they've misguidedly decided to follow the POFA.   So if you don't have your say on the new CoP and Framework that will govern PPCs North and South of the Border when it takes effect, then things in Scotland for future private parking scams will be as bad as it is here:

Get ANGRY and GET EVEN about this scam! 

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have and there are just 3 weeks left:

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters and MUST GO.  Remove that layer and you remove the ‘drivers’ behind the race to court.

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

Responses into the PAS 232 and MHCLG framework documents are not completely straightforward:

On the MHCLG response, you have to answer the questions on a 1-5 scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree, and then put some commentary. No way to upload documents or alternatives.

 

On the PAS 232, you have to click on each clause and sub-clause to put your comments, and a suggested rewording of their draft.  You can see comments which other people have written! 

 

But, when you click ‘submit’, a message pops up to say your comments have been received, but that only applies to the particular clause you have just addressed.

 

You have to click ‘submit’ separately for each individual clause response.

 

Some people will be caught out by this but can revisit it and add further responses up to 12 October.

 

 

Fairwinds

Umkomaas said:

Why are you even bothering?  But if you're determined to poke a stick in the hornets' nest, leave it out. 

I'm not determined at all - previously I would have always ignored, but not frequented these boards for a few years, and thought the guidance had changed to say that I should now always appeal - happy to ignore if that is the guidance.

Coupon-mad

Ignore them but definitely put in your comments on the two consultations and tell the MHCLG in the wider framework one how worried you are that a race to court is about to happen in Scotland due to keeper liability.  You are stuck with that decision because your Ministers have already voted for it, so think about your comments as being 'damage limitation' and stopping the incentivisation and money in it that causes the race to court.