Confused as to what date I write to ParkingEye?

garethpick

Hello everyone, I've been reading the Newbie thread and am confused as to exactly when I write to ParkingEye?

Someone Who Isn't Me (SWIM) had an alleged infraction at a Holiday Inn car park (failing to input car reg into terminal) and received a "Parking Charge Notice Reminder" 12 days later from ParkingEye (£100, reduced to £60 if paid immediately)

There's no mention of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 on the back of the notice. Can I assume this is the Golden Ticket?

Some of the templates seem to suggest SWIM needs to wait 19 days before writing to ParkingEye so that they receive the letter on the 20th day and reply to back on the 21st day.

I'm confused why that is.

Can I also check that ParkingEye will refuse the appeal and then SWIM writes to POPLA and wins on the grounds that they refuse to identify the driver?

Thank you for any help

(P.S. SWIM has also written to Holiday Inn asking for a cancellation of the charge, the signage was very poor and confusing)

Umkomaas

Some of the templates seem to suggest SWIM needs to wait 19 days before writing to ParkingEye so that they receive the letter on the 20th day and reply to back on the 21st day.

The delay in the timing of an initial appeal only applies to windscreen tickets, to coax the PPC away from applying to the DVLA for keeper details - if they don't access them via the DVLA, then PoFA can't apply.   As it seems your case was an ANPR camera capture, PE will have already accessed the DVLA database, so this strategy doesn't work here. 

There's no mention of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 on the back of the notice. Can I assume this is the Golden Ticket?

It would only likely to be shown on the original Notice to Keeper (NtK) - the Reminder is irrelevant. Does the NtK have the PoFA paragraph (reverse side)?  Please give us the date of the parking event and the Date of Issue/Sending as shown on the Notice to Keeper. 

It's good strategy to complain to the landowner. In fact, Holiday Inn have been quite helpful, if somewhat slow, in the past, although if memory serves me well, some have had to write to the head honcho in the USA to get blockages in the system removed! 

D_P_Dance

Tell them that their signs are pants, read this. and complain to your MP.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5972164/parking-eye-signs-oxford-road-reading/p1

garethpick

Hi Umkomass, I know I mentioned "Parking Charge Notice Reminder" but strangely this was the first letter SWIM received. ParkingEye seem to be playing some funny games with their wording, perhaps to try an induce people to pay up by pretending they already sent a 1st letter. As this letter was sent 12 days after the first I doubt they even sent a 1st letter.

Alleged Parking Infraction: 16/07/2021

Date Issued (I presume this means their first notice: 19/07/2021

Date: 28/07/2021 (this was received by post on 29/07/2021)

No the rear of the notice doesn't mention PoFA. You can view the letter front and back (minus SWIM's details) above

Finally, if SWIM wrote to the landowner, wouldn't they be confirming that the Registered Keeper was also the Driver of the vehicle on the alleged infraction date? And potentially Holiday Inn might reveal this to ParkingEye.

garethpick

According to the NEWBIES thread SWIM should first write to ParkingEye with the following:

1) 
"I am the keeper of vehicle xxxxx responding to your Parking Charge Notice xxxx

The PCN fails to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, namely, but not limited to, 9 (2) (f), failing to give the keeper notice of possible liability. I can not have any liability in this matter. I have no requirement in law to provide details of the driver at the time of the event and will not be doing so. We do not expect to hear from you again, other than to confirm that there will be no further action.

Yours sincerely,

SWIM"

2) This will be rejected by ParkingEye 

3) SWIM then appeals to POPLA with the template provided on the NEWBIES thread.

4) POPLA cancels the ticket

Is this sequence the best way to start?

Thanks for any help

Coupon-mad

The Reminder is irrelevant.

The PCN is the one that has to comply with the POFA if they want to hold the keeper liable. it probably did even if you do t recall receiving it last week.

Appeal as per the NEWBIES thread which doesn’t suggest delaying postal PCN appeals (only a tactic for windscreen ones).

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!

Umkomaas

The dates don't look right to me. If the parking event was on 16 July 2021, the usual PE 28-day deadline (following the issue date of the NtK) will not yet have expired.  It's only after the expiration of the 28-day deadline do 'Reminders' normally enter the picture. 

I notice you've covered up the date of the parking event on that reminder notice, but would you please double check it and confirm it is a July date, because the timing of the reminder would better fit with a June date. Let's get to the bottom of this. 

Coupon-mad

No not with ParkingEye, they send a reminder within a week of PCN.

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad said:

No not with ParkingEye, they send a reminder within a week of PCN.

You know what, I've never noticed that previously.  Thanks @Coupon-mad, @garethpick, you can stand down on double checking the dates. 

garethpick

I lost this POPLA appeal. Decision below (I've "xxx" out the identifying information that might doxx me.

-------

Operator Information and Evidence

Submitted XXXXXXXX

Verification Code

XXXXXXXXXXXX

We have received your comments and we will begin your assessment in due course

Operator Name

Parking Eye Ltd including Car Parking Partnership (CPP) - EW

Operator Case Summary

The operator didn't provide a case summary

POPLA assessment and decision

XXXXXXXXXX

Verification Code

XXXXXXXXXX

Decision

Unsuccessful

Assessor Name

XXXX XXXX

Assessor summary of operator case

The operator has issued the parking charge notice due to either not purchasing a valid pay and display ticket, by remaining in the car park for longer than permitted, or by not entering your registration details via the terminal.

Assessor summary of your case

The appellant states the operator has not shown that the individual it is pursuing is the driver and potentially liable for the parking charge. The appellant states the signs are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

The appellant has identified as the registered keeper of the vehicle on the day of the parking event. As such, I am considering the appellant’s liability for the PCN, as the keeper. When entering onto a private car park such as this one, any motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage in place sets out the terms and conditions this contract. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place in the car park, which states: “Patrons Only Car Park…Hotel day visitors must enter their full, correct vehicle registration details into the terminal at reception upon arrival to be entitled to free parking for the duration of their stay…Failure to comply with the terms & conditions will result in a Parking Charge of: £100.” The operator has issued the parking charge for either not purchasing a valid pay and display ticket, by remaining in the car park for longer than permitted, or by not entering your registration details via the terminal. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the vehicle, entering the car park at 16:03:37 and exiting at 20:56:03, totalling a stay of four hours and 52 minutes. The operator has provided evidence to demonstrate that the appellant’s vehicle was not registered on the day in question. The appellant explains that the operator has not shown that the individual it is pursuing is the driver and potentially liable for the parking charge. While I appreciate these comments, in order for the registered keeper to be liable for the parking charge, the operator has to follow the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012. Having reviewed the evidence, I consider that there looks to be a contract between the driver and the parking operator, and the appellant has not provided a current name and address for service for the driver. Further, the notice sent complies with the relevant provisions. I am satisfied that the operator has met the strict requirements of POFA 2012 to transfer liability to the keeper of the vehicle. The appellant states the signs are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge. I note the appellant’s comments however; the operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage on site. From the evidence provided, including the site map I can see that there is signage located all around the site informing motorists of the terms and conditions. Given this, I must consider the signage in place at this location to see if it was sufficient to bring the terms and conditions to the attention of the driver when entering and parking at the location. In addition to this, Section 19.2 of the BPA Code of Practice states that “Entrance signs play an important part in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore, as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of…” Having considered the evidence provided, I am satisfied that the operator had installed a suitable entrance sign at this location, and this was sufficient to make motorists aware that the parking is managed on this particular piece of land. Furthermore, within Section 19.3 of the BPA Code of Practice, it states that: “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…” Having considered the signage in place, I am satisfied that the operator has installed a number of signs throughout the car park, and these are sufficient to bring the specific terms and conditions to the motorists’ attention. In my view, these are “conspicuous”, “legible and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand.” The appellant states in response to the operator’s case file that the images of the signage are outdated and were not on site on the day they visited. While I note these comments, the appellant has not provided any evidence to demonstrate that the signage was not in place. As such, I am satisfied the evidence provided by the operator is sufficient to show there is sufficient signage at the site. I appreciate has stated within their comments that the operator should supply evidence of the planning permission, an engineer report to demonstrate the terminals were in working order and photographs of the vehicle parked in a bay on site. I can base my assessment only on the evidence presented. It is not within my remit to gather evidence for, or insist that specific evidence be provided by, either party. I am satisfied from the evidence both that the site’s terms were made clear, and that the driver breached them by failing to enter the vehicle details on site. I am therefore satisfied that the PCN was issued correctly and must refuse this appeal.

Your POPLA appeal is now complete

You can print out a copy for your records

The parking operator has been informed of the decision.

Paying your parking charge

If you would like to pay your parking charge now, you can do so below by selecting make a payment.

Please note:

The parking operator has provided us with the payment site for your convenience and POPLA is not affiliated with the payment site in any way.

Unhappy with the outcome?

You cannot challenge POPLA's decision. However, there are alternative routes to resolve your dispute. You may wish to seek advice from the Citizen's Advice Bureau or seek independent legal advice.

garethpick

Any advice on whether I should continue to fight?  Might be easier to throw in the towel and pay the £100

Don't really want the hassle of more letters, County Court Summons, bailiffs, debt collectors etc. etc.