Hello all,
I should start my saying, I'm writing on behalf of my partner who has received this letter and I'm trying to help get it sorted as partner is understandably very stressed to return from hols and receive this letter for a PCN that was issued supposedly over 17 months ago (but this is the first we hear of it). I've read through the info in the Newbies and have also done an advanced search of forum posts for this same location of the PCN. Lots of info to take in (I've taken a page of notes) so my apologies for the separate thread as I have a touch of information overload and I hoped that people might help me get clear on how to proceed.
So here are the facts on this one:
- DCBL (Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd) letter dated 11th August 2021
- Titled: Notice of Debt Recovery
- Date of contravention on the letter is a date in early March 2020
- Client of DBCL is Parkingeye Limited
- Location is Town Quay Southampton
- Vehicle is not a lease/hire or company car
- DCBL are pursing a parking charge of £170 on behalf of Parking Eye
- Previous PCNs were not received, letter reports that these were sent to a previous address. Have checked V5c and other DVLA documentation for vehicle and keeper and address has been updated since the time of the supposed parking charge.
- Letter states that DCBL used a tracing service to find this address.
- Partner called DCBL last night (in retrospect and having read the Newbies thread, shouldn't have)- made it clear that didn't know who the driver was. DCBL allege that previous PCNs were sent to previous address and as such appeal not possible.
- However, was given the Parkeye portal website where we have been able to view the images they have of the car entering and exiting the car park. On the Parkeye portal the option to appeal via their online service still opens and I assume is therefore possible.
Complications:
- With it being so long ago and having only just learnt about this PCN, my partner is unsure about who was driving and why the vehicle was there. This car park is often used by customers of Red Funnel Ferry. I understand that historically at least this land was subject to bylaws which may aid/effect the claim against ParkingEye.
- Because my partner did not receive the previous PCNs, we do not know if they were issued within the Freedom of Protection Act 2012 timescale
- Around this time my partner actually had their bag stolen which had DVLA doc within it and Covid and lockdown did cause a delay in receiving replacement docs once requested. This might reflect why PCNs (if indeed multiple PCNs were sent- don't trust these private parking companies) were sent to previous address.
I found a thread for the same location which was immensely useful and I wonder whether that the following points could be used in the process of an appeal (just not sure whether we can use Point 1 though since they claim to have attempted to contact at previous address):
1) This Parking Charge Notice was issued outside of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 timescale - Schedule 4, Paragraph 9 (4 and 5) clearly states that this must be within 14 days.
2) Parking at this site is subject to Associated British Ports Southampton Harbour Byelaws 2003 (“the ABP Byelaws”); this location is therefore not relevant land for the purposes of POFA 2012.
Please see below for details of the Associated British Ports Southampton Harbour Byelaws 2003. A copy of the document can also be found here at this web address:
www.abports.co.uk/media/h10piawn/southampton-harbour-bye-laws-2003....pdf
Page 20 clearly shows the map detailing the location in question
3) No Evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice
As this operator does not have proprietary interest in the land, I require that they
produce an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner. The contract and any
'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including exemptions - such as
any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of
veto' charge cancellation rights – is key evidence to define what this operator is
authorised to do and any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact
have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just because an agent
is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the
agent is also authorised to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers
and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land
use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).
Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed,
generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A
witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I
suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by
each party to the agreement.
Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption
clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times
set out in the BPA Code of Practice) and basic information such as the land boundary
and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the
various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and
of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to charge (which cannot be
assumed to be the sum in small print on a sign because template private parking
terms and sums have been known not to match the actual landowner agreement).
Section 7 of the BPA Code of Practice defines the mandatory requirements and I put
this operator to strict proof of full compliance:
7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges,
they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their
appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.
7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:
a) the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries
of the land can be clearly defined
b) any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement
operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation
c) any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not,
be subject to parking control and enforcement
d) who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs
e) the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.
4). As an additional point, I remember reading somewhere about private parking companies having a maximum charge limit? Is this the case? Is this something that could be used to contest a £170 fine for 20 mins?
My plan is as follows:
1) Appeal with ParkingEye
2) Go through Popla if above fails
What else should I be doing? Many thanks for any advice you can offer.
