Parking charge by UKPC for 'out of hours parking'. Chances of success on appeal

Umkomaas

Fruitcake said:

I now have a crick in my neck.
It looks PoFA compliant to me, although you redacted the date of the NTK it is obviously within date.

I agree. The date of the parking event can be found in the main body of text lower down the NtK and the dates are ok from a PoFA standpoint. The 9(2)(f) warning could be surgically dissected to find chinks, but it would be unlikely to persuade POPLA. 

Coupon-mad

I repeat what I said already and I told you what to concentrate on.

Stop chasing shadows in a NTK and look at the bigger picture in the POFA Schedule 4.

kelfish

Thanks for your help.
Having looked at everything I have (I have attached a photo of the signs in the retail park - I am). I believe my appeal is based on the following:-

• UKPC have no Locus Standi
• There is no land owner authority for raising such an invoice
• Accordingly, UKPC cannot raise an invoice for what is, effectively, trespass.
• As the vehicle was allegedly present during a prohibited time there can be no parking contract as a contract can't be entered into in respect of a forbidden act. The 'act' (if any) is trespass. (Parking Control Management V Bull - UKPC V Masterson - Horizon Parking v Mr J
• The signage is inadequate. There is no signage in relation to the prohibited time at the entrance and by the time a driver has entered and read the sign it is too late
• The amount in the invoice is excessive and disproportionate for a vehicle being in a car park late in the evening when presumably it was more or less empty
• However, the NTK is compliant with POFA.

I do feel relatively confident, particularly on the 'no contract' (Bull) issue.
On these bases, is an appeal likely to succeed?

kelfish

Forgot to mention the 'forbidden' sign simply says 'No Parking between the hours of 20.00 and 07.00' (Photo of sign attached on previous post)

Redx

Excessive and disproportionate won't wash since the 2015 Beavis case , Supreme court decision

The forbidding signage means no consideration means no contract , so invalid PCN

kelfish

Thanks to everybody who has assisted and made posts. I admire you, sending tens of thousands of posts and giving your time to help people. If I was wearing a hat I would take it off to you.

kelfish

Just to update all interested.

I appealed against the UKPC parking charge on the following bases:-

a) Parking was prohibited at the time the alleged parking 'offence' took place. Therefore there can be no contract
b) The grace period was insufficient (the car was allegedly 'parked' for 12 minutes)
c) Signage is inadequate. (There is no signage for 'prohibitive parking as you enter and such signs are only found in the car park after the cameras have been passed)
d) The notice was defective. (The signs at the car park said no parking between 20.00 and 07.00. The notice said parking was prohibited between 8.30 PM to 7AM.)

It appeared that the NTK was compliant.

I appealed to UKPC in early April and today got a letter saying the appeal was successful and they were cancelling the parking charge which, having read numerous posts on the forum, was unexpected.

A big thank you to all that assisted with advice and for all the sterling work you are doing for free on here. 

Le_Kirk

Well done - a notable success.

Umkomaas

Wow, nice one. 👍

I suspect it was starting to sound too complicated for them to deal with, especially on the 'forbidding' nature of the signage and the contradictory times. 

Well done, get yourself out for a nice beer - don't forget your puffer jacket, beanie hat and ski gloves!  🍺