'Unauthorised parking' what does this actually mean?

barns80

D_P_Dance said:

Have you considered wring bad stuff about Premier Inn on TripAdvisor, Trivago, hotels.com, boooking.com, etc.

To be honest, I thought about it but I felt I should appeal first, and if that didn't go well, then I would leave some bad reviews... however now I'm looking at this appeals process, I'm wishing I'd written the bad reviews first!

The car park in question actually has a Beefeater pub/restaurant on it, it's within walking distance of my house and it was our usual pub for family get-togethers. I certainly have no intention of ever setting foot in there ever again as it stands at the moment!

D_P_Dance

 I certainly have no intention of ever setting foot in there ever again


It is never too late to write a damning review when scammed by a parking parasite.

Umkomaas

You haven't shown us the date of the parking event or the date the NtK was issued, but assuming they meet PoFA compliance requirements, the rest of the NtK is compliant, so driver vs keeper is irrelevant - they are legally entitled to hold the keeper liable. 

If there are no other choices in the drop down box of reasons, you head the initial appeal (in BLOCK CAPS), that none of the above apply, but you are forced to tick one in order to progress the appeal, then you just launch the blue text initial appeal template from the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, first post, into the appeal window. 

Then, you complain to the BPA that the drop down box unfairly acts against the consumer by not providing any other options other than those dictated by the PPC and which are loaded against the consumer. 

Make sure you screenshot every step of their appeal pro forma as it's unlikely you'll be able to retrieve the details later. 

barns80

Umkomaas said:

You haven't shown us the date of the parking event or the date the NtK was issued, but assuming they meet PoFA compliance requirements, the rest of the NtK is compliant, so driver vs keeper is irrelevant - they are legally entitled to hold the keeper liable. 

Thanks! I'm within the time to appeal, but I probably need to do it today really.

I'll do exactly as you suggest

Umkomaas

barns80 said:

Umkomaas said:

You haven't shown us the date of the parking event or the date the NtK was issued, but assuming they meet PoFA compliance requirements, the rest of the NtK is compliant, so driver vs keeper is irrelevant - they are legally entitled to hold the keeper liable. 

Thanks! I'm within the time to appeal, but I probably need to do it today really.

I'll do exactly as you suggest

You might have misunderstood my reference to dates, but just to finally confirm (or otherwise) their total PoFA compliance, please let us have:
Date of parking event 
Date of issue of the NtK

barns80

Umkomaas said:

You might have misunderstood my reference to dates, but just to finally confirm (or otherwise) their total PoFA compliance, please let us have:
Date of parking event 
Date of issue of the NtK

Sorry, I realise I did misunderstand you. Basically the date of event was 26/03/2021, and the date issued was 01/04/2021.

Thanks again

Umkomaas

barns80 said:

Umkomaas said:

You might have misunderstood my reference to dates, but just to finally confirm (or otherwise) their total PoFA compliance, please let us have:
Date of parking event 
Date of issue of the NtK

Sorry, I realise I did misunderstand you. Basically the date of event was 26/03/2021, and the date issued was 01/04/2021.

Thanks again

As I suspected, within date requirements, so keeper liability applies. 

barns80

Thanks for double-checking that. I've sent the appeal, I've also replied to the Premier Inn just to voice my dissatisfaction with their response.

I'll post some bad reviews as well, and then I think start working on the next stage of my appeal. I'll get the photos I took up online at some point today so you guys can see them.

Coupon-mad

the images ParkMaven supplied me simply show my vehicle at the entrance to the car park, is that really enough to state a contravention occurred?

Yes.  They probably used ANPR.

But you do NOT have to use any stupid list of appeal reasons...Jeez PPCs are desperate to scam people.

barns80

Coupon-mad said:

the images ParkMaven supplied me simply show my vehicle at the entrance to the car park, is that really enough to state a contravention occurred?

Yes.  They probably used ANPR.

But you do NOT have to use any stupid list of appeal reasons...Jeez PPCs are desperate to scam people.

Yeah, it's ANPR. It's the sort of entrance that I imagine people use quite frequently to turn around - it's a busy road, lots of cars parked either side, and then this junction is there, which turns out to be an entrance to a car park.

I'm a software developer and my job is often to think of 'edge case' scenarios where procedures would be triggered for the wrong reasons. I can imagine a course of events where the ANPR camera would register the front number plate of a car, then the back number plate later, but the car never actually enters the car park.

So it made me wonder whether they'd actually need to prove a vehicle was stationary inside the car park?

I'm going to fire a complaint off to the BPA about their data capture form on the appeals process. I do think it asks leading questions designed to make sure the appeal is unsuccessful in many cases.