Grace periods if extend period of parking (Parking Eye PCN Abersoch)

j302323

Hi. I’ve spent several hours reading all the newbie threads and many others to pick up on all the background of discussions here. I wanted to ask a question about grace periods I couldn’t see specific comment on, from searching on the forum, specifically if extend the period of parking during a session (i.e. 1 hour then later top up for 1 more hour), would there be considered more than one grace period i.e. could you argue 2 grace periods apply if were two sessions of parking paid for? (Since I've drafted the below I've seen more comments saying grace periods on entry apparently may not be valid).

Background - received Parking Eye PCN for car spending 2 hours 30 in one of their car parks (Abersoch Beach / Golf Club – I have seen several threads about the poor signage separately). 2 hours parking was paid for, in two individual 1 hour payments via a parking app.

Issue here being car was parked for 2 hours, driver did not realise was a PE car park where timings were being measured on entrance / exit of the car park, not time car actually parked/unattended.

- Took 18 minutes from arrival to buy ticket on app for 1 hour (finding parking space on busy weekend in school holidays, getting out of car, going over to machine for driver to get app parking details, getting app to work etc then sorting payment),

- Another additional 1 hour parking was paid 8 minutes after the first period expired,

- Then driver back at car before time app noted second parking period expired - time exiting car park meant the final exit time was 4 minutes after the expiration of the second period of parking. If driver had known it was a PE car park and that the entrance/exit period was what they were monitoring, then could have done differently, but driver took to be as normal pay/display car park where pay on leaving car and need to be back at car by expiration of parking. Signage was not clear for anything else. Parking app did not offer chance to, or say needed to, backdate time for time already spent in car park.

I have seen comments noting grace periods of 10-11 mins at start and end of parking. The 30 mins would therefore be over this so an unlikely route of appeal. Just wanted to ask has anyone seen / consider it worth an appeal to POPLA that would get 2 grace periods if the parking was paid for in two separate transactions, like was done here? Or unlikely to be good grounds for the appeal, and would be better going for the unclear green signs hidden in trees in the Abersoch car park and similar other extended grounds as I have seen on some of the other Abersoch car park threads?

Unsuccessful (as expected) claim to PE as keeper so far, so now to determine whether the POPLA route appeal worthwhile on either the grace period, or unclear signage etc routes (plus all the other applicable standard ones suggested in the POPLA template letters).

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

D_P_Dance

If it takes so long to pay for parking with an app,(whatever that is), why not use coint of the realm.  

Redx

The BPA CoP version 8 2020 defines grace periods in clause 13 , but arguing it in your case is difficult for half an hour unpaid. Do not read anything older than 20 month's , so nothing from 2019 or earlier

Only Popla and ultimately a judge in court can answer the questions regarding liability or not

Overpayment of 2 or 3 payments fully covering time on site is easier to plead , so if the total paid covered 3 full hours then you would have a better legal argument in court

j302323

Thanks. Yes the main issue here is the time initially spent waiting for a space to become available given the car park was full on arrival. Without that then the car wouldn't have been in the car park for as long, and may have been within the automatic PE grace periods.
I have seen some successful POPLA appeal claims at Abersoch on here on grounds of unclear signage (green due to planning permission issues), so now I just need to consider likelihood of success of that route I guess!

D_P_Dance

Waiting for a space is not parking,  read this

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html

Umkomaas

Is the NtK PoFA-compliant, ie received within 14 days of the parking event (parking event day being day 0) and/or have a paragraph on the reverse side headed 'Protection of Freedoms Act'?

I have seen some successful POPLA appeal claims at Abersoch on here on grounds of unclear signage (green due to planning permission issues)

I've never seen any appeal upheld on planning permission issues, and in any event signage would come under Advertising Consent - another rabbit hole leading nowhere for you. 

Redx

The busy car park and obscure signs re factors , but I believe that the payment could have been made to cover the whole period and difficult to argue based on one payment , paying again without leaving doesn't double the grace periods allowed under the new CoP , I suspect that you have read appeals made before 2020

Your choice if you want to try , but would have to be detailed and eloquent to Popla or to a judge

Applying 4 grace periods is novel , am interesting proposal , but the opportunity was there to pay for 3 hours and have a good case , but being tight could cost you dear

We get very few complaints about overpayment , but hundreds of thousands of underpayment issues on here annually

j302323

Thanks all.
- Had just seen that note re 'waiting for a space is not parking', which is basically the same here. However it seems may be challenging to argue this
- Yes the NtK does have the PoFA paragraph unfortunately, seems like PE have updated the back of their Ts and Cs from previous years
- Thanks, appreciate your comments. The additional grace periods was just something I wanted to ask to see if any thoughts on it. More the expected line of argument was unclear signage (not due to planning permission, just as generally unclear) - there was no clear signage that payment should be made to cover the time that the car was in the car park in total, rather than the time the car was actually parked. There was nothing clear to indicate the parking was not as per most pay and display car parks where you pay for your time once parked, and then have to be back at the car by the time your ticket says that it expires.
I have seen some comments on other threads of Abersoch that the car park machine asked people to estimate their time of arrival - whereas the parking app used (as recommended in the car park) did not ask this.

Redx

You can try all that in any appeal , but parking eye have tended to comply with POFA for more than 6 years , it's how they got Barry Beavis on a free car park , sometimes they fall to comply , the golden ticket , but POFA compliance is generally met in most cases

j302323

Yes PoFA sadly not looking an option here. 
I have some pictures of the site and the signs are not very clear, however I've seen that this won't always work with POPLA so trying to gauge whether worth continuing. From the close up shot of the parking sign it still isn't clear in writing of any size that the entrance/exit is when they are judging the time from, it just appears as per any other pay and display car park.
I have seen some old POPLA decisions suggesting that PE don't always contest / provide evidence from their side when their is a thorough document sent to POPLA by the keeper. However I imagine they'll be very rare cases where they don't put in a response.
As mentioned above about time spent parking, and the comments on 'waiting is not parking' - I've seen advice saying it would be on the parking company to prove that the car was parked for the specified time. But seems like may be difficult to get POPLA to agree on that one from other threads I have read.

Redx

And therein lies your conundrum

Having paid twice , it can be did that you did seek out and read the sign and actually complied with it , twice !!

But you failed to pay for the duration of the full time on site , plus one grace period at the end of the second payment period

I just wish that 3 hours had been paid for , £4 , easier to argue at Popla and in court , especially as 2 payments of £1 per hour is a contract breach , you only paid £2 , not £4

Parking Eye are difficult to beat if their ducks are all in a row , Barry Beavis lost 3 times , 3 different courts , so don't assume that they won't sue !!  Sorry to say but I don't see a win here