PCS (Parking Collection Services) Challenge

buppa1

Hi, 

I got a parking ticket from PCS (Parking Collection Services). 
Unfortunately I didn't challenge the windscreen notice and was sent Notice to Keeper. 

I live at the address and have a valid parking permit, but at that day I forgot to display it. 

I am going to challenge by using the "TEMPLATE ''ONE SIZE FITS ALL'' FIRST APPEAL THAT DOESN'T SAY WHO WAS DRIVING:" 
from **NEWBIES!! PRIVATE PARKING TICKET? OLD OR NEW? **READ THESE FAQS FIRST!** Thankyou! topic. 

The above topic says: 
"You can (carefully!) add a little to the template above, 'in order to resolve the dispute I attach copies of...':"

I would like to add the following. 

In order to resolve the dispute I attach a copy of a valid permit for a parking space at the development, where the notice to keeper has issued and sent to and where I, the keeper of the vechicle live (and the vechicle's V5 is registered at). 

Could you please advise if the wording is ok or if I should change something?

Actually, the notice to keeper doesn't state the exact location (street name, building name, parking bay number), it just states the name of the whole development.
Reason for issue: 10-Parking on Private Land without a Valid Permit and/or Authorisation.
There are some photos on their website, also not showing the exact location - just the front of the car and the windscreen. 

Thank you

buppa1

Btw, they will probably deny it anyways, as I had a similar problem with them 2 years ago, when I just moved in here.
Eventually I won the case at POPLA, but they answer to my initial challenge was as follows:

"the vehicle was parked without a valid permit on display. This was a breach of the terms and conditions and the PCN was correctly and legitimately issued as a result.

I appreciate that you may have been awaiting the arrival of your permit, however, the terms and conditions regarding displaying a permit apply to all motorists that park on site. A valid permit must be displayed in accordance with the signage so that the warden can verify that the vehicle is permitted to be parked on site. On this occasion, the warden was unable to verify this, so they issued the PCN accordingly.

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."

Coupon-mad

Yes send that to PCS if it says they handle NTK appeals for the PPC. But who is the PPC?

D_P_Dance

If this is a residential car park please read these, google "Primacy of Contract, and complain to your MP?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.html

https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/forum/residential-letting-questions/1053920-private-parking-companies

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad said:

Yes send that to PCS if it says they handle NTK appeals fir the PPC. But who is the PPC?

I suspect it's Parking Enforcement and Security Services (PESS) as there have been a bit of a run of these, fronted by PCS, over the past few days. BPA outfit, so has POPLA potential. 

But, subject to the OP confirming the identity of the PPC. 

buppa1

Thank you for the answers. 

The creditor is: Parking Enforcement and Security Services (PESS). 

The NTK says: We are writing on behalf of the creditor in relation to an unpaid charge.

KeithP

@buppa1, what happened next?

buppa1

The challanged got refused and I appealed to POPLA and they decided to not defend the appeal.

I used the following grounds:

1)    A compliant Notice to Keeper was never served - no Keeper Liability can apply.

2)    The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge

3)    This charge is incompatible with the rights under the lease - as decided by the Appeal case of 'JOPSON V HOME GUARD SERVICES' case number: B9GF0A9E on 29th June 2016, which also held that the Beavis case does not apply to this sort of car park.

4)    This charge is unconscionable and offends against the penalty rule which was 'plainly engaged' in the case of ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis

5)    The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself

6)    Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice–Non Compliance

7)    No Evidence of Landowner Authority 

UncleThomasCobley

For future reference, what does your lease/AST say or not say about parking and permits?

buppa1

My least has no information about parking and permits.

There was an email from the management saying:

"PESS UK is a third-party company which the estate has used to enforce parking regulations on (the estate) for several years, and is a member of the British Parking Association.

Among their responsibilities is issuing Penalty Charge Notices to cars parked in breach of the regulations that are prominently displayed on notices located throughout the estate."


Anyways they deal with visitors bays only (starting this year):

"You will not be issued with a permit for your own private bay as these bays are not monitored by the parking company anyway."

Coupon-mad

That's a good thing, that they are not allowed near your bays.  NEVER agree to that. EVER.