DCBL Letter- first heard about charge- Town Quay- Southampton- advice

lemons21

Castle said:

lemons21 said:

Obviously, once we have the info from SAR, we'll hopefully know a bit more. Really tricky given it was 17 months ago and this is the first we have heard about it. 

On a separate note, following research and with the details we currently have about the PCN (from Parking Eye portal), we have worked out that the driver had entered Town Quay Car Park in order to use Red Funnel's drop off zone, which you are permitted to use for 15 mins. 

I am unclear on whether the compulsory five-minute minimum “grace” period – as set by the British Parking Association – is valid in case of users entering to use the 15 minute drop off zone. However, the PCN states that the vehicle was there for 21 minutes. Should the 5 minute minimum grace period be applicable here, this case is a measly 1 minute outside of their tolerance!! 

The 5 minutes only applies if the driver decides not to enter into a contract; so if they use the 15 minutes drop off zone there's a 10 minutes BPA grace period, (13.3), to leave at the end of the 15 minutes. (Of course "in the real world" the driver will also need time to read all of the signs when they first enter the drop off zone).

 Thanks for this. Am I right in understanding then that this case lies within this grace period? The time lapse between the ANPR camera at the entrance to the car park (therewith multiple different conditions for parking and multiple zones including the drop off zone)  picking up the NP and the camera at the exit picking up the NP is 21 minutes. In that period, the driver drove to the drop off zone and it is assumed waited for the time allowed before moving from this zone and driving back down to the exit. 

In tolerance? Or am I misunderstanding?

lemons21

Redx said:

Yes , SAR as well as the data rectification notice , but not discussing the case , heed what Umkomaas says

Thank you Very helpful 

Will go with DRN and SAR then. 

I guess I was trying to line everything up should anything else come back from PE. 

The more and more I look into this and the limited images that PE have that are readily accesible to us on their 'Portal', the more I think that the vehicle was actually using the area according to their T&Cs. I'll save all of that though, in case they do come back with anything 

Redx

It's one aspect , but a judge would probably apply fairness and hat is reasonable , any unforeseen delays , the CRA 2015 , etc

Plus bylaws may apply , so that raises its own issues such as only the landowner pursuing a penalty through magistrates court within 6 months of the incident

So many factors

lemons21

Brief update:
We have sent DRN & SAR and emailed the landowner, Red Funnel and local MP.

No replies yet from any of the above but will update this thread if indeed we do hear back.

Thanks so far for all of the advice 

Le_Kirk

Any company (including PPCs) has one calendar month to respond to a SAR.

lemons21

Hello everyone, 

An update for you all:
We sent a DRN & SAR
We also contacted Red Funnel, who were fairly unhelpful ('not our land, not our problem')

We also contacted the landowner, who were very helpful and replied to confirm that they were liaising with Parking Eye, as well as my local MP who also did the same and liaised with PE. 

Our letters to both the landowner and local MP were very detailed, explaining the full extent of the unfair charge, as well as issues about Port Byelaws, inadequate signage etc. 

We received a response from my local MP in which he confirmed that PE had agreed to cancel the charge and that my partner would be receiving written confirmation of this from them. 

Today we received the letter from Parking Eye confirming that the charge had been cancelled.   

Our MP, the landowner and all of your help and advice on this thread has been invaluable to knowing how to challenge this unfair charge, so thank you all so so much!

My partner was initially quite stressed about the letters received and was half tempted to pay the £170 to make the threatening letters go away, so I am so glad that I sought advice from this fantastic forum and challenged the blighters on their unethical practice. 

Another victory folks! Thanks once again! 

Coupon-mad

Brilliant news, showing that the advice in the NEWBIES thread, with this being 'PLAN A' works, again.

My partner was initially quite stressed about the letters received and was half tempted to pay the £170 to make the threatening letters go away,

Wonder if @Terry1931 reckons she should have done, as this new poster has been telling all newbies to do.

D_P_Dance

They have wasted your time, now waste theirs, read this

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/