Are Parking Firms allowed to access new evidence if taken to court?

Humey93

I recently have appealed an "owner left site" PCN through PCM and had my appeal rejected. Unfortunately PCM are not under the BPA branch, and have to make an appeal through IAS, which I know is futile according to the NEWBIE thread. During the initial NTK the only supporting evidence was 4 pictures of my car left unattended in a parking space. The evidence does not show the driver of the car leave the premises, only that the car was left unattended. So back to the question in title, would PCM be able to request new evidence from the shop that I was in to prove that the driver left the premises if taken to the small claims court?

Thanks very much.

KeithP

Please copy your post above as a reply on to your existing thread - the thread you started yesterday.

But to answer your question - yes they can. just as you can seek new evidence to bolster your case.

BrownTrout

its unlikely they would

D_P_Dance

Any driver left site  claim is likely to struggle in court imo, it could well breachunfair T&C CRA 2015, read this

https://www.michelmores.com/news-views/news/guide-consumer-rights-act-2015-part-1-unfair-terms

tacpot12

You might have a claim against the shop if they release video of you to a third-party. They are supposed to tell you why they are videoing you in the store, and this wouldn't normally include so that third-parties can be given evidence that you shopped in the store. It would normally be to protect their business only. 

fisherjim

Who on earth do you think these muppets are MI5?

They won't be requesting any video evidence from any body, this is just a chancers scam they try on, in the hope that some will fold and pay up.

There have been very very few go to court on this made up ruse, especially after the "toothbrush" case which frightened them off!

Coupon-mad

Humey93 said:

I recently have appealed an "owner left site" PCN through PCM and had my appeal rejected. Unfortunately PCM are not under the BPA branch, and have to make an appeal through IAS, which I know is futile according to the NEWBIE thread. During the initial NTK the only supporting evidence was 4 pictures of my car left unattended in a parking space. The evidence does not show the driver of the car leave the premises, only that the car was left unattended.

So back to the question in title, would PCM be able to request new evidence from the shop that I was in to prove that the driver left the premises if taken to the small claims court?

No, they have no evidence.  It won't happen, and you will win.

CHANNEL YOUR ANGER ABOUT THIS PATHETIC CHARGE TO CHANGE THE WAY THE PARKING INDUSTRY WORK:

CALLING ALL NEWBIES! 

 

An urgent task – deadline approaching in a week or so:

Please now make a real difference because not enough people have yet, and time is running out. 

The Government is consulting for just a few more days, about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework intended to rein in the rogue parking firms. 

Does it go far enough?  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation (two separate consultation documents).

HOW TO DO THE SUBMISSIONS:

BSI PAS 232 – COMMENTING ON THE CODE OF PRACTICE AS DRAFTED :

1.    You will need to register then log in, to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker.  

 

2.    Register, log into the BSI page, and download & read the cover letter here:

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

 

3.    Read the cover letter again and note the suggested extra questions... if you agree that, say, the 'loading/unloading and dropping off, asking for directions, and disabled people parking on double yellows as they can on street' activities listed should be exempt (not parking events, what do you think?) then please go to the Annexes at the end of the PAS Code and find the one about Exempt Vehicles and state what other activity you think should be added to the exempt list. 

 

4.    Download the PAS itself and start commenting on what you wish to say something about.  Quick links to each section appear on the left of your page. 

 

You don’t have to comment on everything, e.g. you might want to skip the definitions and focus on later sections, and certainly look at the Annex tables at the end that show things like consideration & grace periods and exemptions.

 

5.    Submit comments when you are happy with them. Don’t just ‘SAVE’ and forget!

 

THAT IS HALF THE JOB DONE!

THE MHCLG CONSULTATION IS EASIER AS IT IS JUST A LIST OF QUESTIONS. 

 

6.    You can do it first if preferred or pushed for time:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=EGg0v32c3kOociSi7zmVqAVPfAOtwRxLhHRwQ610oElUMzhQSVo0WUQ4SERVSEZaUU9DTUhFQ1VMUy4u

If your answers exceed 4000 characters (approx. 500 words to a single question or 16000 words (approx. 2500 words) for all the questions below, you can email your answers to parking@communities.gov.uk as long as you state who you are.

 

THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS YOU WILL SEE, FOR RESPONSES TO THE FRAMEWORK:

Q1 Do you agree or disagree that members of APAs should be required to use a single appeals service appointed by the Secretary of State?

Strongly agree/Somewhat agree/Neither agree nor disagree/Somewhat disagree/Strongly disagree

 

Q1.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q2 Please provide any other feedback on the determination of appeals, including the funding model and features that an appeal service should offer e.g. telephone or in-person hearings, the ability to submit evidence online

(free text)

 

Q3 Please provide any comments you have on the proposal to enforce the Code by combining the ATA’s existing audit procedures with additional safeguards.

(free text)

 

Q4 Please outline any alternative means by which the Code could be monitored and enforced. You may wish to cite evidence from other regulatory frameworks which are relevant.

(free text)

 

Q5 Please provide any feedback you have on the proposed governance arrangements for monitoring the new Code of Practice

(free text)

 

Q6 Which parking charge system is most appropriate for private parking?

 a) the Three-tiered system

 b) Mirroring the Local Authority system

(free text)

 

 Q6.1 Please explain your answer. You may, for example, wish to make reference to other deterrent frameworks (for example, for railway tickets or traffic violations)

(free text)

 

 

Q7 What level of discount is appropriate:

40% as is currently offered in private parking and suggested in the three-tiered system, or

50% as is offered in Local Authority parking?

a) 40%

b) 50%

 

Q7.1 Please explain your answer, including whether the discount should be set at a different level

(free text)

 

 

 Q8 How should the level of parking charges be set and how should the levels be revised in future?

(free text)

 

 

Q9 Do you agree or disagree in principle with the idea of the Appeals Charter?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q9.1 Please explain your answer

(free text)

 

 

Q10 Do you agree or not that the examples given in the Appeals Charter are fair and appropriate? Agree/Disagree

 

Q10.1 Please explain your answer.

You may wish, for example, to suggest additional cases to be covered in an Appeals Charter or query existing examples.

(free text)

 

Q11 Do you agree or disagree that the parking industry should contribute towards the cost of the regulation?

Agree/Disagree

 

Q11.1 Please explain your answer.

(free text)

YOU CAN INSTEAD GIVE MORE CONCISE ANSWERS ONLINE, USING THE MHCLG PAGE LINK.

Don’t forget that answering these questions is the easier bit…

Looking at the BSI PAS (the draft code of practice itself) involves logging in and submitting comments again, and again and again and takes more time!

There is a discussion about PAS submissions and what the pages look like, here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6195417/am-i-doing-something-wrong/p1