CIVIL ENFORCEMENT - Muntz St, Birmingham

sir_shad

Hi folks, just in the process of appealing a PCN from Civil Enforcement which has been issued where terms and conditions of the parking are "Authorised vehicles only". In small print, the PCN states "This notice is issued under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012." The blue text template from the newbies thread will be used for the appeal, in reference to the small print, does anything else need to be considered for the appeal? 

KeithP

As you have previously been advised, no changes are needed to the blue text template appeal in the NEWBIES thread.
Send it as the keeper.

D_P_Dance

Have you complained to your MP?

Umkomaas

We have helped you previously with four different parking charges over the past 18 months or so. You don't seem to have gone to the trouble of telling us the outcomes. What about some feedback before we give out more advice that we will never know whether it was successful or not?  Otherwise it's rather a waste of out resources.

sir_shad

Umkomaas said:

We have helped you previously with four different parking charges over the past 18 months or so. You don't seem to have gone to the trouble of telling us the outcomes. What about some feedback before we give out more advice that we will never know whether it was successful or not?  Otherwise it's rather a waste of out resources.

Hi, apologies for not providing the feedback on my previously raised posts. That is bad on my part, but i dont spend as much time as you on here and at times even forget i raised a discussion post. Those previous posts are closed now so i cannot comment. I'll make sure to provide feedback on each post from now. 

With this one, my initial appeal has been rejected by Civil Enforcement and i was given 28 days to appeal to POPLA of which i only have one day left now!!  Gotta go and find those POPLA templates now! 

Redx

Correct , appeal to Popla using

POFA

No keeper liability
No landowner authority
Poor and inadequate signage
The BPA CoP

Etc

The Popla code is valid for 32 days , not 28 , so by Friday

sir_shad

Redx said:

Correct , appeal to Popla using

POFA

No keeper liability
No landowner authority
Poor and inadequate signage
The BPA CoP

Etc

The Popla code is valid for 32 days , not 28 , so by Friday

I have put an appeal for POPLA together. Can anyone review please? Hopefully you can access it with this link

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6fhh7gb4868n1st/POPLA Appeal Draft.pdf?dl=0

Coupon-mad

Can you copy and paste it here as well in a reply, and if you've used a standard template POPLA point unchanged from the ones in post #3 of the NEWBIES thread, such as 'unclear signs' and 'no landowner authority' just delete the wording please and put (as per POPLA TEMPLATE).  

Saves us reading the stuff we don't need to read.

I haven't clicked on the link but if it starts with that horrendous intro that people persio=st in copying like it's a good thing (using 'I'' followed by a comma...twice...arggh...) please remove the entire intro before posting it here or we'll scream...It's a monstrosity of an intro; a grammatical aberration that is not good English.

sir_shad

Coupon-mad said:

Can you copy and paste it here as well in a reply, and if you've used a standard template POPLA point unchanged from the ones in post #3 of the NEWBIES thread, such as 'unclear signs' and 'no landowner authority' just delete the wording please and put (as per POPLA TEMPLATE).  

Saves us reading the stuff we don't need to read.

I haven't clicked on the link but if it starts with that horrendous intro that people persio=st in copying like it's a good thing (using 'I'' followed by a comma...twice...arggh...) please remove the entire intro before posting it here or we'll scream...It's a monstrosity of an intro; a grammatical aberration that is not good English.

Contents

No Evidence of Period Parked – NtK does not meet PoFA 2012 requirements 

The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge 

No Evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice 

Vehicle Images contained in PCN: BPA Code of Practice – non-compliance

Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice – non-compliance 

The ANPR System is Neither Reliable nor Accurate

No Evidence of Period Parked – NtK does not meet PoFA 2012 requirements

Contrary to the mandatory provisions of the BPA Code of Practice, there is no record to show that the vehicle was parked versus attempting to read the terms and conditions before deciding against parking/entering into a contract.

Furthermore, PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 paragraph 9 refers at numerous times to the “period of parking”. Most notably, paragraph 9(2)(a) requires the NtK to:

“specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;”

Civil Enforcement NtK simply claims “Location of Parked Vehicle” at Small Heath Wellbeing Centre, Muntz Street, Birmingham, B10 9RX.

The NtK separately states that the vehicle “entered Small Heath Wellbeing Centre, Muntz Street, Birmingham, B10 9RX at 18:38:54 and departed at 18:55:57. At no stage do Civil Enforcement explicitly specify the “period of parking to which the notice relates”, as required by PoFA 2012.

I require Civil Enforcement to provide evidence to show the vehicle in question was parked on the date/time (for the duration claimed) and at the location stated in the NtK.

The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge

Unchaged

No Evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice

Unchanged

Vehicle Images contained in PCN: BPA Code of Practice – non-compliance

Unchanged

Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice – non-compliance

The BPA’s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) states that:

“If a driver is parking without your permission, or at locations where parking is not normally permitted they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.2) states that:

“If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.4) states that:

“You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.”

The BPA Code of Practice (13.4) clearly states that the Grace Period to leave the car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. Whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (it should be made clear - a contract was never entered in to), it is reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace period stipulated in 13.4 is also a “reasonable grace period” to apply to 13.1 and 13.2 of the BPA’s Code of Practice.

On 30th July 2015, the minutes of the Professional Development & Standards Board meeting show that it was formally agreed by the Board (of BPA members and stakeholders) that the minimum grace period would be changed in 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice to read 'a minimum of eleven minutes':

“Implications of the 10 minute grace period were discussed and the Board agreed with suggestion by AH that the clause should comply with DfT guidelines in the English book of by-laws to encourage a single standard. Board agreed that as the guidelines state that grace periods need to exceed 10 minutes clause 13.4 should be amended to reflect a mandatory 11 minute grace period.”

The recommendation reads:

“Reword Clause 13.4 to ‘If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 11 minutes.”

(Source: http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/Meeting Notes/Governance/20150730_PDandS_ Board_Action_Notes.pdf)

This shows that the intention of stating vaguely: 'a minimum of ten minutes' in the current BPA CoP (not a maximum - a minimum requirement) means to any reasonable interpretation that seconds are de minimis and therefore not taken into account – certainly an allegation of under eleven minutes (as is the case here) is perfectly reasonable.

As stated earlier in this section, whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (as a contract was never entered in to), it is not unreasonable to suggest that clarification of this time period in relation to 13.4 also goes some way to clarifying the terms “reasonable period” and “reasonable grace period” stated in 13.1 and 13.2 respectively of the BPA’s Code of Practice.

If the BPA feel “a minimum of 11 minutes” is a reasonable time period to leave a car park after a period of parking, it stands to reason that at least the same period of time is reasonable to also enter a car park, locate (and read) terms and conditions (in this case in the dark with no lighting), decide not to enter into a contract and then leave the car park.

It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question (which Civil Enforcement Limited claim was 17 minutes 3 seconds) is not an unreasonable grace period, given:

a) The lack of sufficient signage throughout the car park in question (non-compliance with BPA Code of Practice 18.3) and the impact of that upon time taken to locate signage prior to entering into a contract.

b) The site is not well lit and relies on nearby street lighting as its primary source of lighting.

c) The failure to light signage adequately so as to make signs visible from all parking spaces (which they are not, especially at night time) and legible once located.

All factors discussed above serve merely to increase the time taken to: • Locate a sign containing the terms and conditions.
• Read the full terms and conditions.
• Decipher the confusing information being presented.

• Decide not to park and therefore enter into a contract. • Return to car and safely leave the car park.

The ANPR System is Neither Reliable nor Accurate

Unchanged

Coupon-mad

Remove this as it never wins at POPLA and you have no evidence:

The ANPR System is Neither Reliable nor Accurate

Replace with the standard one about unclear signs. that is always worth including regardless of signs.

sir_shad

Coupon-mad said:

Remove this as it never wins at POPLA and you have no evidence:

The ANPR System is Neither Reliable nor Accurate

Replace with the standard one about unclear signs. that is always worth including regardless of signs.

Thank you, i'll make the changes and submit it.