Couldn't buy a ticket and left after 15 mins - NTK received using ANPR

Vic20

Hello,

I hope you are all well.

Wondering if anyone can advise on a NTK PCN received from TPS with ANPR photo for staying 16 mins without a ticket.

Background: we entered the car park knowing it was Pay & Display but not aware of ANPR which is not mentioned anywhere at the entrance, nor being able to review any terms and conditions before entering as there were none displayed. There was no mention of any grace period either. Also, the signage was all on the passenger side so the driver can't really read this easily.

It's a small car park with limited space so it took a few mins to manoeuvre, another few mins to find the machine as it was dark, more time spent to fully read the "Your personal data" sign in small writing to see what it said, yet more mins on how to use the machine as the lighting is poor and they all have different instructions, and then an additional few mins trying to enter a reg plate and actually pay for parking as the machine display was too faint and the keys didn't seem to register first time. The machine kept rejecting coins so after struggling to figure out how to use the machine in the dark and not being able to see the display very well, we just left which took another few mins to trudge back to the car. We have children so there was an adult in the car at all times during the period that somebody else went to the machine as we've been to places before where it took 20 mins to get a ticket.

Are there sufficient grounds for appeal on the following basis?

1. The ANPR only shows entry and exit times and does not prove the car was actually parked.

2. When entering the car park, the sign is on the opposite side of the driver and you can only read that it is Pay & Display.

3. You can't read the terms and conditions on entry as there are none, only a "Your personal data" notice which you also can't read from the car.

4. You have to stop and get out of the car and go to the machine to actually read the terms and conditions which are in the tiniest font in a poorly lit area (attached for reference - see below).

5. There is nothing at the entrance that says ANPR will be used so it's impossible for the driver to know this will be enforced.

6. There are no signs explaining any grace period for finding a parking space and making a payment.

7. The parking charge is £2.90 per hour so the penalty charge is disproportinate to the alleged loss incurred (car park was pretty much empty).

8. Impossible to park without actually seeing the terms and conditions beforehand. How can you be contractually bound upon entering the car park when there is no recourse to actually reading said terms and conditions before entering the car park?

9. The machine has a poorly lit display making it difficult to read properly, especially in the dark as the contrast is faint (attached for reference - see below).

10. The lettering confirming the PCN is tiny, much smaller than the rest of the text and certainly smaller than the actual tariff.

11. The NTK says the "the terms and conditions, to which the driver agrees to be contractually bound upon entering the car park, are clearly placed in prominent places throught the site". The T&C's are in just one place on the actual machine in a very tiny font (as per 4 above).

12. I've also looked at the NTK and compared to section 9 of the POFA but it looks like it's compliant. However, looking at section 2(2), 2(3) and 12 of POFA, it mentions "adequate notice" for charges but given it only mentions the PCN once in tiny letters, I think it fails on this. Certainly not PE vs. Beavis compliant in big letters. Sign attached for reference (see below).

There's a few days before the 14 day deadline expires for discount bribe payment so would like to get this done before then. I've read the Newbies FAQ (thanks for putting this together) and will use the TEMPLATE 'ONE SIZE FITS ALL' FIRST APPEAL THAT DOESN'T SAY WHO WAS DRIVING that is posted here.

Any further tips and / or advice would be much appreciated as I've never had a PCN before. We feel we have a strong case but thinking that the PPC will argue using CCTV as evidence the car was parked, or that the PDT machine was functioning perfectly and show masses of other tickets successfully processed on the same day. TPS also seems to have a tendency for litigation which we want to avoid just because it seems a long drawn out process and with kids, home schooling and work commitments, it'll be tricky to find the time to respond.

In the meantime, Plan A has been enacted; I've contacted nearby businesses to try and find out who the landowner is but am not optimistic about this as it's not a retail park and there are only a few businesses around the site. I've taken some pictures in similar lighting and will go back to take more from different angles.

Thanks for reading. 

Kind regards,

Vic20

NTK (redacted)


Charges (redacted)


PDT machine (redacted)

Le_Kirk

Plan A is always best.  If you have read the NEWBIE sticky you will know that complaining to the retail owner or landowner is your first shot.  If there is no retail outlet, then Plan B, the template appeal as you have found.  Those photos are far too good, although you don't need them for this stage of the exercise, if it comes to a further appeal or court claim, you need photos taken in the same lighting conditions as when you parked.

Vic20

Thanks for the reply Le_Kirk. I'll take further photos for similar weather conditions but if there are still deemed too good then will revert back to signage not being clear. What I we find dark may be ample light for others so it's subjective whereas the placement of signs and size of letters is unambiguous.

Le_Kirk

It's all subjective but any parking company that's truly "managing" the site would ensure that ALL signs are illuminated using that wonderful stuff called 'lectric that, I am told, can power things called lights!

Redx

The Beavis case 6 years ago put paid to number 7 , which is not a penalty charge either , its a parking charge

Signage , lighting , landowner authority , the relevant CoP , the CRA 2015 and POFA 2012 all play a part in this

Signage usually has an icon for cameras , a bit like the picture you provided , they rarely have large notices up saying anpr cameras in use , although it's probably the most common enforcement measure over the last decade

Anpr cameras almost always monitor time on site and not the time parked , hence any grace period allowances in the CoP

D_P_Dance

Everything is far too wordy imo.  Complain to your MP.

Vic20

Thank you all for the replies, it's much appreciated. Plan B is in progress as there is no retail outlet and the (alleged) landowner has no interest in helping. Will post back once the inevitable cut and paste reply from the PPC is received.

Vic20

Good morning,
I hope you're all well.
Just a quick note, is there any point / merit in delaying the initial appeal for a postal NTK? Reason I ask is that I won't be able to get pictures of the site until at least a few days and thinking best to get these before starting the process in case the PPC suddenly decides to change the signs / lighting / anything else.
I'm on day 14 but appreciate the discounted charge bribe is nothing more than an attempt to get victims to pay up so have another 2 weeks (and as the Newbie FAQ says, process is different for windscreen tickets).
Regards,
Vic

KeithP

Get the pictures as soon as you can but that shouldn't delay the initial appeal as you won't be sending pictures with it. As @Le_Kirk said "you don't need them for this stage of the exercise".

The keeper should send the blue text template appeal that you have already found.
There is no point in delaying the sending of it. Send it unchanged.

Fruitcake

There is normally no advantage in delaying an appeal where ANPR scameras have been used. However, you have 28 days to appeal a BPA scammer.
Do not miss the appeal deadline, but it won't hurt if you want to wait a few days so you can get pics of the site and signage from the viewpoint of a driver.

It would be useful for you to tell us the location of the alleged event as it may have cropped up here before. You can also search this forum for the site. Sadly the search facility is not very good due to a site "upgrade" a while ago. Sometimes an internet search using the same criteria, but adding mse or moneysavingexpert to the search engine might give better results.

Vic20

Thanks for the replies.
I have already searched and the location has cropped up on here once only, and fairly recently too, that I can see but the poster is still going through the process which appears to have become litigous. Reading through the other threads, it seems that PPC's sometimes read this board so I'm thinking not to share it just yet, especially as the alleged landowner has no interest in helping.
I'll be sure to provide more details though when needed, or if it's deemed safe / appropriate to do so.