PCN for Marazion Long Stay and Overflow...

Johnersh

What is the PCN issued for? The o/p says 'alleged infraction' but was that an overstay, a parked in the wrong place or failure to pay on arrival? 

All appear to have been considered by forumites as possibilities, but it'll be only one.... 

CosmonautX

I think I mentioned it on the first page, but IP are claiming "unpaid tariff time" on the PCN we received which I am assuming to be an overstay. We have our receipt and payment info showing we paid for the time we were there (and were within the grace period for entry/exit) and zhonguonuren's photos of the signage and machines seem to show that we used the machines correctly to pay, in spite of the contradictory wording on pay any time/pay on arrival. With all that in hand, we're going to appeal through IP's own internal appeal system. I expect it to be a rejection as from the little I can find on Marazion FB groups it seems to be the experience of locals challenging IP, but we can then go to POPLA using the info on the forum here. 

EDIT: 

...and rejected, as expected. Reply took less than an hour to arrive - couple of snippets from what seems to be boilerplate stuff:

"We have carefully reviewed the case and considered the points that you raised in

conjunction with the facts and evidence available to me. On this occasion, your appeal has been rejected and we are satisfied that this Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly. St Michael’s Mount & Long Stay Marazion Overflow Car Park is private land and is subject to a parking management scheme put in place by the operator at the landowner’s request. There are specific terms and conditions in place as part of this scheme. These terms and conditions are stated on the signs installed at the site, which are displayed in clear and prominent positions."

"Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that they seek out, read and comply with the terms and conditions of parking that are in place. By parking on site in breach of these terms and conditions, it has been agreed that the charge detailed on the signs will be paid. I appreciate that this may not be the desired outcome, however, you have now reached the end of our internal appeal process."

Will move to POPLA and take it from there. Not sure on the turnabout time, but if there are any updates soon I'll try to post them here.

 

kcwro

Is that the carpark where you park for the boats to St Michael's? I've just put up a separate post as we've been nailed with PCN for not paying (we did, by automatic charge machine near shops), but I'm not sure whether the little carpark where we parked (to left of road) is pay on exit or pay and display. I didn't see any boards in the bit where we were.

kcwro

By the way, zhonguonuren, you obviously park in the same car park as we did - are you allowed to pay on exit, as we did? If so, do you have to put into the machine how many hours you have been there or does it (as I assumed) calculate the time from the Parking Eye photographs?
Also, if the answer to the above is yes, has anyone been successful with appealing this further, yet?? 

Coupon-mad

Appeals are unlikely to win because POPLA is not as independent as it should be and is about to be replaced by a single appeals service overseen by a Government Scrutiny Board (yes, the industry is that out of control that the MHCLG has stepped in to regulate it from 2022). 

Just slow down and read ANY POPLA threads including ‘POPLA DECISIONS’ at the top of the forum where you hit ‘new thread’.  We assume you have now also read the NEWBIES FAQS thread before posting and now know how to appeal. 

tartan_ted

Hi all - newbie here, reading through this post and many others after receiving a letter in relation to this same car park.  Would just like to say many thanks to zhonguonuren for the many helpful photos.  I think they show that the only signs are placed near the entrance of the car park, which is as I remember, and that there are no signs placed anywhere else in the field, visible from a parked location.  This would seem to be in breach of section 19.3 of the BPA COP, below (emphasis added).

"19.3 Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm."

devonfan

Hi CosmonautX... as you say Streetview is no help, so we are trying to recall/work-out which part of the carpark(s) we were in exactly... and if it was the same one as you... so we can also perhaps use the great photos kindly provided by zhonguonuren??
 
What does it says exactly on your PCN, ours says "St Michael's & Long Stay Marazion Car Park"

We have nothing and not local, but were in the adjacent part closer to the seafront / playground?

Coupon-mad

tartan_ted said:

Hi all - newbie here, reading through this post and many others after receiving a letter in relation to this same car park.  

Please don’t miss the Government Consultation!  I see you only posted once but hope you see this, and everyone else too!

Please comment on the government consultation concerning parking charges and complain to your MP about the proposal to allow fake add on debt recovery costs.

There’s only 3 weeks left!

Government Consultation re private parking charge levels, August 2021: PLEASE BOOKMARK THIS THREAD — MoneySavingExpert Forum

We are calling for everyone to do a full and robust response by email to the MHCLG, attaching evidence of what happened to you and what you think is wrong about £100 charges and fake debt recovery ‘fees’ that no PPC actually incurs or pays. 

We also need people to contact their MP to ask questions about why the MHCLG appear to have performed a U-turn on their March promise to cap parking charges, and why instead they propose to fund the race to court at £70 a pop? 

Posters are being encouraged to ask their MPs to ask questions about why  PPCs have been allowed to persuade the MHCLG that they can add £70 per PCN for sending the same letters ParkingEye always do.  

That would be handing ParkingEye maybe £70m extra per annum from public pockets!  Whether your PCN was from that company or not (and others pretty much all add the false costs) I am sure you object, same as we do, to this extortion and illegality.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78517562/#Comment_78517562

To anyone reading this: 

PLEASE DO THIS IF YOU WANT CONSUMER VOICES TO OUTWEIGH THE PARKING INDUSTRY’S GREED. WHICH SEES THEM TRY TO CLAIM MORE THAN THE LAW ALLOWS, FROM A REGISTERED KEEPER.

The proposals breach primary law!  I just looked at the POFA Explanatory Notes (part of the legislation):

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/notes/division/5/1/3/3

221.Paragraph 4 provides that the creditor has a right to recover unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the relevant vehicle if the conditions set out in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 are satisfied. The creditor is not obliged to pursue unpaid parking charges through this scheme and may seek to do so through other means but they may not use the scheme provided for here to secure double recovery of unpaid parking charges (paragraph 4(6)), nor will they have the right to pursue the keeper, as opposed to the driver, of the vehicle where they have sufficient details of the driver’s identity. The right to reclaim unpaid parking charges from the vehicle keeper does not apply in cases where the vehicle has been stolen before it was parked, (paragraphs 4(2) to (3)), or in certain circumstances where the vehicle in question was a hire vehicle (paragraph 4(7)). The creditor may not make a claim against the keeper of a vehicle for more than the amount of the unpaid parking related charges as they stood when the notice to the driver was issued (paragraph 4(5)

zhonguonuren

tartan_ted said:

Hi all - newbie here, reading through this post and many others after receiving a letter in relation to this same car park.  Would just like to say many thanks to zhonguonuren for the many helpful photos.  I think they show that the only signs are placed near the entrance of the car park, which is as I remember, and that there are no signs placed anywhere else in the field, visible from a parked location.  This would seem to be in breach of section 19.3 of the BPA COP, below (emphasis added).

"19.3 Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm."

Any other signs around the site (which is pretty big) were not apparent and if it comes down to this point, I can walk around and take photos of different parts.  Sorry I should have done that but I was concentrating on the main areas.  

tariqm

Hi all

I too am in the same boat (I think) as the o/p cosmonautX: received a PCN for allegedly overstaying my parking by 20 minutes or so. But I do not recall that at all- I paid (bank statement from the day showed a charge of £1.50 by contactless). 

Does anyone know whether you have to enter how many hours/min you parked, or do the parking meters calculate the fee due automatically? 

If the former, then maybe it was a genuine mistake on my part, but I am normally careful, and so was extremely surprised to receive the PCN.

Anyway, I appealed the PCN, but this was rejected, but I never received the rejection letter (dated 02.08.21) until it was forwarded to me by the debt collection company who are now demanding £170 (and even offering a payment plan). I wrote to the debt collection company saying could I pay the initial reduced fee of £60, and they said no. I asked them if Initial Parking had sent the letter by recorded delivery, and they said no. 

I am tempted to stick to my guns here. I do not want to pay £170 for what may well be an underpayment of a few pence, which may have been a genuine mistake. Again, I do not want to pay this, because I did not receive the rejection letter outlining my options of appealing to POPLA or paying a reduced fine. I even stated that I had been working hard on the frontline as an NHS key worker, and this was my first break in 18 months, but that was ignored by the debt company too. 

Any advice on what I should do next? 

It sounds as if Initial Parking is run by cowboys, and many many people have been caught out.