NCP fine, C2C railway land. No appeal afforded me other than court.

Redx

Dizzyflop said:

Umkomaas said:

I think they might have grabbed a tiger by the tail here!  Yess, keep at 'em!  I can't see either C2C or NCP having the stomach for this kind of a fight.

I responded with this. 

Thank you for your reply. It is in fact a Parking charge notice and not a Penalty Charge Notice. The difference being a Penalty Charge Notice is wholly backed by the law whereas the former is not. 

Could you please provide the name and email address of the NCP contracts manager that this matter has been passed to. 

I was hoping the the Managing Director would think this issue serious enough to deal with personally. It is certainly serious to me that there is potential disability discrimination occuring here and that I have so far been persued unlawfully due to all of this. 

Absolutely brilliant reply and exposes their lack of knowledge as well !!

We would all bump elbows with you 😁😁❤️❤️👍

Fruitcake

Dizzyflop said:

brianposter said:

Have you printed a copy of the relevant webpage ?

I have just taken a screen recording of the google street view of this station from approach to exit, zooming in on signage etc. One good thing about some of google street views trips are that you can see the date the street view was taken, and prior date data too. My ticket was in August 2020. I didnt find out  about it until late December 2020. They sent me ohotographic evidence of site signage, taken  some time between late december 2020 and late march 2021. Google street view was last updated in NOV 2020 which is very handy for evidence. I can also see other streetview historical lack of signage on site stretching back to 2009. 
Whilst this may not be taken as primary evidence, google have no ties to the PCC, and as i live in another county, am a restricted, disabled, vunerable person in a pandemic which has been locked down with the rest of the UK, i cannot get to site to take video at first opportunity (December 2020!)  Nor photos. The photos i have have been supplied of the site have been taken by a family friend. 
I do plan to go and take my own videos and photos. 

Last night i was reading  Robertcox999's thread  and it got me thinking re thw ruling behind not accpeting his photos or videos with a timestamp. 
If the carpark has a pay machine, it will have to have the date on it. 
If the PCC are claiming their ticket machine is fit for purpose, then a video of site that specifically shows the ticket machines date clearly in the video could be more evidence of the date of video. The same goes for my railway ststion which has a digital type display in the station itself. This will  have the date on it too. You could also focus on a daily paper, which will obviously only show the earliest date the video could be valid from. 
This could work for photo evidence too by getting the paper in the shot, and then emailing the photo to yourself that same day to prove it could only have been that day.

How does that sound to avoid evidence being dismissed? 

Ive also been asking questions on twitter- each response of theirs i have had back i have retweeted, screenshotted and then emailed a screenshot to myself, incase they want to delete it. 

Those are all good ideas about time and date stamps, some of which have been suggested before. I would be surprised if a judge didn't accept a GSV dated screenshot. In the county court, small claims work on the balance of probabilities, and if a google image gives a capture date, I would suggest on the balance of possibilities, it was indeed the date the image was taken.
The important thing is to ensure the capture date is included in the image and not cropped out. I have seen photos where the latter has happened.
I created a GSV Tutorial that is linked from one of the stickies, and that was one of the points I made, as well as the ability to search for historical images.

Digital images contain metadata, which is data about the image such as time and date, location if the camera has built-in GPS. It can be accessed by looking at the image properties, so taking screen shots as you open up the folder, image, properties, image data etcetera showing it applies to the photo in question, which the camera gives a unique identification number can be used as well.

The reverse logic can be used in court. You could ask to see the metadata for an image that has a time and date imposed on the image, because it can be "painted on" using a photo editing programme.
It is therefore possible to have a doctored photo showing one time and date yet the metadata shows a different one.

UKPC got caught out when they doctored time stamps to make it look like a motorist stayed much longer than was actually the case.
They got a slap on the wrist and were allowed access to keeper data again by the DVLA after a ban of only a few weeks.

Fruitcake

Redx said:

Dizzyflop said:

Umkomaas said:

I think they might have grabbed a tiger by the tail here!  Yess, keep at 'em!  I can't see either C2C or NCP having the stomach for this kind of a fight.

I responded with this. 

Thank you for your reply. It is in fact a Parking charge notice and not a Penalty Charge Notice. The difference being a Penalty Charge Notice is wholly backed by the law whereas the former is not. 

Could you please provide the name and email address of the NCP contracts manager that this matter has been passed to. 

I was hoping the the Managing Director would think this issue serious enough to deal with personally. It is certainly serious to me that there is potential disability discrimination occuring here and that I have so far been persued unlawfully due to all of this. 

Absolutely brilliant reply and exposes their lack of knowledge as well !!

We would all bump elbows with you 😁😁❤️❤️👍

Agreed. If the principal who employed the scammers doesn't know the difference, what chance does the general public have?
Don't get me started on hire companies that pay a scamvoice because they don't know the difference between a fine, penalty, parking charge notice, and an authority.

brianposter

I am not sure whether I have looked at the correct webpage, but "parking is free for disabled users in designated parking spaces" does not leave much in the way of loopholes..

Consequently, it would seem to be far from obvious that the signs can create a contract with someone who knows that they do not need to read the signs.

Fruitcake

It doesn't specify a designated disabled space, just a designated parking space. Any bay with a lane painted around it, even if it is half covered in leaves, is a designated space, disabled motorists free parking for the use of.

Dizzyflop

Fruitcake said:

If I was wearing a hat, I would take it off to you. 
You have done your own research, acted upon every suggestion made by the regulars, taken the initiative, and taken on the principal who hired the scammers. You have done everything right, and I wish every victim who came here had your tenacity.
If everyone who had ever received a scamvoice had done what you have done, and in only a matter of a few days to boot, this unregulated scam would have been crushed years ago.

Bravo.

Well done! I would be honoured if you ever felt the desire to join us as on this forum to help others.

As i said, this is personally my first ever run in with a parking charge/penalty of any kind. I didnt even know it was this bad, but i will stick around and help wherever i can. Thank you for your kind words. 

Dizzyflop

Fruitcake said:

Dizzyflop said:

brianposter said:

Have you printed a copy of the relevant webpage ?

I have just taken a screen recording of the google street view of this station from approach to exit, zooming in on signage etc. One good thing about some of google street views trips are that you can see the date the street view was taken, and prior date data too. My ticket was in August 2020. I didnt find out  about it until late December 2020. They sent me ohotographic evidence of site signage, taken  some time between late december 2020 and late march 2021. Google street view was last updated in NOV 2020 which is very handy for evidence. I can also see other streetview historical lack of signage on site stretching back to 2009. 
Whilst this may not be taken as primary evidence, google have no ties to the PCC, and as i live in another county, am a restricted, disabled, vunerable person in a pandemic which has been locked down with the rest of the UK, i cannot get to site to take video at first opportunity (December 2020!)  Nor photos. The photos i have have been supplied of the site have been taken by a family friend. 
I do plan to go and take my own videos and photos. 

Last night i was reading  Robertcox999's thread  and it got me thinking re thw ruling behind not accpeting his photos or videos with a timestamp. 
If the carpark has a pay machine, it will have to have the date on it. 
If the PCC are claiming their ticket machine is fit for purpose, then a video of site that specifically shows the ticket machines date clearly in the video could be more evidence of the date of video. The same goes for my railway ststion which has a digital type display in the station itself. This will  have the date on it too. You could also focus on a daily paper, which will obviously only show the earliest date the video could be valid from. 
This could work for photo evidence too by getting the paper in the shot, and then emailing the photo to yourself that same day to prove it could only have been that day.

How does that sound to avoid evidence being dismissed? 

Ive also been asking questions on twitter- each response of theirs i have had back i have retweeted, screenshotted and then emailed a screenshot to myself, incase they want to delete it. 

Those are all good ideas about time and date stamps, some of which have been suggested before. I would be surprised if a judge didn't accept a GSV dated screenshot. In the county court, small claims work on the balance of probabilities, and if a google image gives a capture date, I would suggest on the balance of possibilities, it was indeed the date the image was taken.
The important thing is to ensure the capture date is included in the image and not cropped out. I have seen photos where the latter has happened.
I created a GSV Tutorial that is linked from one of the stickies, and that was one of the points I made, as well as the ability to search for historical images.

Digital images contain metadata, which is data about the image such as time and date, location if the camera has built-in GPS. It can be accessed by looking at the image properties, so taking screen shots as you open up the folder, image, properties, image data etcetera showing it applies to the photo in question, which the camera gives a unique identification number can be used as well.

The reverse logic can be used in court. You could ask to see the metadata for an image that has a time and date imposed on the image, because it can be "painted on" using a photo editing programme.
It is therefore possible to have a doctored photo showing one time and date yet the metadata shows a different one.

UKPC got caught out when they doctored time stamps to make it look like a motorist stayed much longer than was actually the case.
They got a slap on the wrist and were allowed access to keeper data again by the DVLA after a ban of only a few weeks.

Thanks for that info. I shall look your GSV suggestions up and apply what i can. Hopefully.it doesnt come to that! 

Dizzyflop

brianposter said:

I am not sure whether I have looked at the correct webpage, but "parking is free for disabled users in designated parking spaces" does not leave much in the way of loopholes..

Consequently, it would seem to be far from obvious that the signs can create a contract with someone who knows that they do not need to read the signs.

You will be interested by this tweet i found in their tweet history (im new to twitter  to get quick responses by people who dont know what they are talking about yet work for the company😘) 

Dizzyflop

If one tweet counts as evidence..... i can park where i want as long as the Dbays are full, and no mention of registration..
Add to that MY responses 

And you get an interesting picture building up. 
That is not my real name btw so im not blocking it out. 👍

Dizzyflop

Contradictions all over the place. 
Signage, staff, website. 

Thank you all for your kind words of encouragement.