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

brianposter

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.

I am curious as to how one would put this particular argument in legal terms. Can the website create a deemed contract ?  Or does one argue that reading the website and driving to the carpark constitute an offer and acceptance, so the signs are superfluous.

D_P_Dance

I am curious as to how one would put this particular argument in legal terms.

In seems perfectly clear in QE to me.  

Can the website create a deemed contract 

That surely would depend on how it is worded.   Amazon's website certainly  can.  

Fruitcake

Dizzyflop said:

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! 

The tutorial isn't in the NEWBIES yet, but beamerguy has put it in one of his information threads about abuse of process/double recovery.

Yer Tiz.

Google Street View (GSV) Tutorial — MoneySavingExpert Forum

Dizzyflop

C2c do have a dedicated parking page that states more terms and that registration is needed. 
https://www.c2c-online.co.uk/our-network/our-routes-and-stations/car-parking/

However i argue that it is completely reasonable to say someone wanting to look up parking in a specific location, and googling that specific car park, has every expectation that the official web page that comes up has all pertinent information needed and that if other pages have to be looked at for more information, there is a clear link to those pages within the website itself that invites the user to click on and read it. 
There isnt. 

The parking page that they say to use in their terms-  is ON their signs, IN the car park states extra terms. Thw site however is so generic it doesnt state tarrifs at that parking site, whereas the one i googled and visited does. 
Furthermore in regards to disabled parking it has this to say "There are a certain amount of free, disabled parking at our car parks – available on a first-come, first-served basis." 

Pick over that statement at your leisure but that suggests to me, my disability is only a disability to them when "convenient" for them to recognise it, and only when the 3 (actually only 2) disabled bays are not occupied. 

Le_Kirk

Dizzyflop said:

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 occurring here and that I have so far been persued pursued unlawfully due to all of this. 

Small points - spelling errors.

Dizzyflop

Its made more confusing if you ask me that the site i visited was the given official site for that station. Its an NCP website. 
As i dont live in the area, and even if i did, how am i supposed to know whos site to look at. I chose the first site that google results gave me, and the second site in the results list is the same page. 
The carpark is managed by NCP.
The railway site in parking is opersted by C2C.
 
Why on earth do NCP have a web page for parking if C2C also have a page for parking that supposedly "trumps" NCP's, that has more terms on it, and is not linked from NCP's site? 

Why do the two sites differ in fundamental information? 
Why do both sites information differ from the t&c's and infor given in the csr park AND by C2C'S OWN staff! 

How can someone be expected to know the correct website to visit, if that correct site is only mentioned on the signs IN the car park! 
Why does the "correct" website not have any information about tarrifs at that particular car park.

Id argue there is Far, far, too much confusion in reality to ever be able to say this was clear. 

brianposter

The website which I looked at and was quite explicit was NationalRail. At a guess the carpark is owned by Network Rail and both C2C and National Rail are agents of Network Rail.

On that basis a complaint - here is your website page, please get my PCN cancelled - should go to Network Rail.

Coupon-mad

Yes, I think you make good points, OP, and this can feature in your reply if your initial complaint is fobbed off:

Why on earth do NCP have a web page for parking if C2C also have a page for parking that supposedly "trumps" NCP's, that has more terms on it, and is not linked from NCP's site? 

Why do the two sites differ in fundamental information? 
Why do both sites information differ from the t&c's and infor given in the csr park AND by C2C'S OWN staff! 

Dizzyflop

Coupon-mad said:

Yes, I think you make good points, OP, and this can feature in your reply if your initial complaint is fobbed off:

Why on earth do NCP have a web page for parking if C2C also have a page for parking that supposedly "trumps" NCP's, that has more terms on it, and is not linked from NCP's site? 

Why do the two sites differ in fundamental information? 
Why do both sites information differ from the t&c's and infor given in the csr park AND by C2C'S OWN staff! 

Thanks again CouponMad. 
I had thought today that i may well also be writing to various disability charities to make them aware of what i have found so far and the *potential* discrimination that we all have noted here. 

Im aware some of you may work for, or be involved in such charities, and or may work alongside them here but i feel it is best they are made aware of what this is, and what happens. 

My thinking being even if they cancel the charge, there still needs to be an overhaul of both companies practices so they are in alignment with the law and this doesnt happen to anyone again. I cannot think of better people alongside my MP to ensure these companies do follow through and that changes are implemented, not just site wide but ccountry wide. 
The more i find, the more intolerant of this i am becoming- i can imagine how all of you feel with each PCN,  giving up your time to help thousands of others.
 I cant thank you all enough for what you do. 

Coupon-mad

None of us here work for a Disability charity but I would report this here and show them the complaint exchange and website:

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/contact-us/equality-advisory-and-support-service