NTK Penalty Appeal rejected by Initial Parking in 21 min's without providing any of the info req'd

Taxmanstakenallmydough

Hi 

I received a PCN as the 'Registered Keeper' and after reading LOTS of posts on this Forum, I've appealed as the Registered Keeper, using the suggested template with a few additions (reproduced below).

Initial Parking rejected the appeal by email, 21 minutes after I posted it saying they had "carefully reviewed and considered" the points raised in my appeal (but it looked like a generic response to me), yet they failed to address any of the questions/requests for information/documentary evidence I put in my 'appeal'.

I note the advice on this Forum is to take it to POPLA and not to pay a penny until the Court say you have to, but having read through LOTS of the posts (in particular the results of appeals), there appears to be a significant difference between the quality/content of the PCN's issued by the numerous sharks out there operating under the guise of 'parking providers' and the chances of success at POPLA reflects this.

Unfortunately, Initial Parking appear to be more savvy than some as they have included 'Paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 POFA 2012 in their PCN which was dated 4 days after the alleged 'offence' and delivered on day, and it also includes 4 small (grainy) images of the vehicle that I'm the registered keeper of, showing -

the rear of the whole vehicle (in colour),
a close-up of the rear number plate (in black & white),
the headlights of the front of a vehicle (in colour) with nothing else distinguishable as it's clearly dark and,
a close up (said to be) of the front number plate (in black & white) even though this isn't visible on the image of the front of the vehicle.

(NB.  The same images were on the 'appeal page' of their website showing the dates and times the images were said to have been taken).

Their PCN doesn't contain any images of the signage said to be present at the site (and they didn't provided these images with their response to my appeal even though images were requested) and their PCN doesn't state who the Landowner is or that Initial Parking have their express permission to operate a 'car park' on this land.  Their PCN just says it's "private land operated by Initial Parking (The Creditor)".

The sign in the 'car park' may provide details of the landowner, etc, but the only views on Google maps are from the road and as such, only the rear of what appears to be the sign is visible.  (NB. It's 9-10 hour round-trip by car for me to go and look at it in person)!

Anyway, what I'd like to know is -

1) Do you think their PCN (sent to me as the Registered Keeper) has met all the relevant legislation and contains all the NECESSARY information it to be deemed to have been served correctly and the 'Charge' upheld at POPLA and Court if it went that far?  (None of the individuals present on the evening the alleged 'offence' is said to have occured is prepared to say who was driving).  If so, presumably I'd be fully liable under Sch 4 POFA 2012 if I lost at POPLA and in Court?

2) Is it likely the 'Charge' would be overturned by POPLA as Initial Parking have igorned my request for information and documentary evidence in my Appeal to them or don't they have to provide this evidence/information unless I take my 'appeal' to POPLA?

Thank you


FYI re the PCN -

The location on the PCN is shown as Mousehole Car Park TR19 6PS.

Entry Time: 20:09:03   (NB. Time on ticket found in vehicle after receipt of PCN is 20:13).
Exit Time: 22:47:00

Contravention: Unpaid Tariff Time

(NB. In retrospect, it would appear the PCN relates to staying in the 'car park' for a longer period than paid for.  My understanding is that a table was booked for 20;15 in a nearby restaurant and 2 hours parking was purchased which should have been more than adequate.  However, the table wasn't ready when the individuals present arrived so they had to wait in the bar area, and the subsequent service was slow.  None of those present realised that the 2 hours had elapsed before they left the restaurant and the PCN arrived.  The delay in returning to the vehicle was entirely down to the restaurant).


Wording in my 'appeal' to Initial Parking -

Re: Parking Charge Notice - IPLxxxxxx

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the Keeper of the vehicle.

I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner. I therefore require the land owner's name and address and documentary evidence demonstrating you have their permission to operate on the land referred to in the 'Notice to Keeper', and in what capacity. 

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn.

Since your Parking Charge Notice is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence together with actual photographs showing the location(s) of the sign(s) you contend were at the location on the material date, as well as a close up photographs of these signs.

I also require ALL your ORIGINAL images of the vehicle and driver 'as captured' on the date and time in question. These need to be at least 6" x 4" in size!

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must also include the record of payments made (showing partial VRN's) and an explanation of the reason for the Penalty Charge Notice, as your Notice does not explain it and a valid ticket for the evening referred to in your Notice, has been found in the vehicle.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed and documented by the landowner.

I await your response.

Wording in response from Initial Parking (21 minutes later) -

POPLA verification code: xxxxxxxxxx. Thank you for your appeal received on xx/xx/2021 regarding the above detailed Parking Charge Notice. We have carefully reviewed the case and considered the points that you raised in conjunction with the facts and evidence available to me. On this occasion, your appeal has been rejected and we are satisfied that this Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly. Mousehole Car Park is private land and is subject to a parking management scheme put in place by the operator at the landowner’s request. There are specific terms and conditions in place as part of this scheme. These terms and conditions are stated on the signs installed at the site, which are displayed in clear and prominent positions. The terms and conditions of the scheme at this location state that a valid payment must be made for the length of time the vehicle is parked on site. On xx/xx/2021, the vehicle was parked without this payment being made. This was a breach of these terms and conditions.

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. I appreciate that this may not be the desired outcome, however, you have now reached the end of our internal appeal process. The three options available are listed below: Your options

1) Pay the PCN at the reduced amount of £60.00 by 14 days. After this time the opportunity to pay at the reduced amount will no longer be available and the amount outstanding will rise to the full amount of £100.00. This will need to be paid by 14 days. Payment can be made online by phone or by post. Go to www.initialparking.co.uk, call 0333 023 0138. Payments can also be made by cheque or postal order made payable to Initial Parking Limited. Please ensure you write your Parking Charge Notice number clearly on the reverse. Please do not send cash through the post. Payment can be made using a debit or credit card by calling the automated payment line on 03330230138. For our full Complaints Procedure please visit www.initialparking.co.uk

2) Make an appeal to POPLA (the Independent Appeals Service) online at www.popla.co.uk using the verification code at the top of this response. The only grounds for making an appeal are stated on the website and the appeal must be received by POPLA within 28 days of the date of this response. If you choose not to submit your appeal online please goto www.popla.co.uk for further detail or you can ask us for a form to complete. If you appeal to POPLA, we will suspend recovery activity on the PCN. The charge will not increase further until the appeal outcome has been determined. Please note that if you opt to appeal to POPLA and the appeal is unsuccessful you will be only able to settle the PCN at the full amount of £100.00. The opportunity to pay and the reduced amount will no longer be available. If you choose to pay the PCN you will not be able to appeal to POPLA.

3) If you do not make payment or submit an appeal to POPLA within the relevant timeframe, the outstanding PCN may be passed to an appointed debt collection agency for further action. All costs associated with this process will be added to the full PCN amount. More Information By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (www.ombudsman-services.org) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such, should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.

Yours sincerely,

Initial Parking Limited

I'm quite tight time-wise on this so any advise provided asap would be much appreciated!!!

Ty

Taxmanstakenallmydough

PS.  The PCN arrived with me 6 days after the alleged offence

Umkomaas

1) Do you think their PCN (sent to me as the Registered Keeper) has met all the relevant legislation and contains all the NECESSARY information it to be deemed to have been served correctly and the 'Charge' upheld at POPLA and Court if it went that far?  (None of the individuals present on the evening the alleged 'offence' is said to have occured is prepared to say who was driving).  If so, presumably I'd be fully liable under Sch 4 POFA 2012 if I lost at POPLA and in Court?

The Initial Parking NtKs I've seen recently are PoFA-compliant - the Directors are former ParkingEye senior employees and will know their way around the legislation, so unlikely to be any mileage there for you. 

Unless you can find a technicality (like poor/inadequate signage, or landowner authority, or similar), if IP contest your POPLA appeal, I think POPLA will side with them in agreeing the parking charge was correctly issued - whether it is fair or not might be another matter ..... and so to court (if IP have the resolve to get that far) ..

At court there are litigation risks to both parties. You have to convince the Judge why you should not be liable for the charge, IP have to prove the opposite.  You start at 50:50, and that's about as best I can guess the result of any outcome, sorry. 

Their PCN doesn't contain any images of the signage said to be present at the site (and they didn't provided these images with their response to my appeal even though images were requested) and their PCN doesn't state who the Landowner is or that Initial Parking have their express permission to operate a 'car park' on this land.  Their PCN just says it's "private land operated by Initial Parking (The Creditor)".

You won't get these at initial appeal stage - they are not obliged to produce them to you. You might get some/all as part of IP's evidence pack to POPLA, you should get all in their evidence to court (should it get there). 

Your best bet will be a landowner complaint. The landowner is never shown on PPC signage, but here are a few ideas as to how to ascertain who the landowner might be:

1. Google searches

2. If a retail park, check on any signage which lists the on-site outlets

3. Ask retailers on the site if there is a managing agent

4. Ask retailers on the site to whom do they pay rent

5. Contact the local authority and ask who pays the non-domestic/business rate for the car park (some councils have a spreadsheet on their website)

6. Contact the local Valuation Office and ask if they know. They often have a website which might provide the information 

7. Contact The Land Registry and for around £3 they should be able to provide definitive detail

8. If you haven't already done so, give us the name of the car park, we may have seen other cases there. 

Taxmanstakenallmydough

Thank you very much Umkomaas.  I appreaciate your spending the time to read through all that!

I agree with you.  I was hoping the fact Initial Parking hadn't provided anything I'd asked for (in particular the landowner details and evidence showing their authority for Initial to levy these charges) may mean POPLA would find in my favour, but was wishful thinking I guess :-(   

It's SO frustrating when there's not been any intention by the driver at the time, to try and get away with anything!

Guess I'd better stump up as I'm the Registered Keeper (and will ultimately end up being liable).

£60 lesson learnt re these ANPR 'car parks'.

Feel well and truly ripped off!!!

But THANK YOU once again!

;-)
 

Umkomaas

Why not try a landowner complaint if you've got time. Ask the restaurant if they've had previous problems with the car park and if/how they have been resolved. Might be worth a couple of hours of digging around to see what you can unearth - the restaurant TripAdvisor reviews might help, as might any Facebook page they have. Surprising what jumps up when you dig!  Good luck. 

Taxmanstakenallmydough

OK.

Thank you!!!

Terry1931

You had a contract with the restaurant to provide you and your party with a meal at a reasonable level of service, if they unreasonably delayed this service and delayed you then write to them and claim the excess parking charge.
Remember this is a Parking Charge, it is not a penalty, so the tables are turned.

Tell the restaurant you have to pay £100 and do not wish to have this uncertainty hanging over you. You will start a claim to recover the extra expense incurred as a result of poor service. 

If sanity prevails the restaurant will write to the Parking Charge operator and get the Parking Charge removed.

Another example of where paying ( or informing the need to pay) the charge and taking action to recover at MCOL is an appropriate coarse of action.

Letting everyone know that this is your coarse of action can get very quick results

Redx

Definitely not a penalty , even their own reply stated it was a Parking charge notice , PCN , which is an invoice

Plan A is your best option , it ALWAYS is , so complain ASAP to the restaurant or landowner , nothing beats a landowner cancellation !! Should have been done on receiving the NTK PCN !

IP tend to comply with POFA for the reasons given by Umkomaas above ! Meaning that Keeper liability is likely

IP do not have to prove their case until the Popla appeal stage , plus at the WS stage in a court claim case , and yes they did sue people , good training at Parking Eye ! Hence why they did not reveal their hand at poker ! You have to call their bluff first , if they are bluffing , at Popla or in court

So follow plan A , ASAP

Terry1931

Redx said:

Definitely not a penalty , even their own reply stated it was a Parking charge notice , PCN , which is an invoice

Plan A is your best option , it ALWAYS is , so complain ASAP to the restaurant or landowner , nothing beats a landowner cancellation !! Should have been done on receiving the NTK PCN !

IP tend to comply with POFA for the reasons given by Umkomaas above ! Meaning that Keeper liability is likely

IP do not have to prove their case until the Popla appeal stage , plus at the WS stage in a court claim case , and yes they did sue people , good training at Parking Eye ! Hence why they did not reveal their hand at poker ! You have to call their bluff first , if they are bluffing , at Popla or in court

So follow plan A , ASAP

Why would you appeal to the landowner, unless they are also the restaurant, the landowner may have no responsibility for the over stay, and are perfectly entitled to pursue the PCN.

The leverage begins and ends with the Restaurant. 

A Parking Charge Notice is an extra cost as a result of Poor Service by the Restaurant. 

I Disagree with RedX's  advice as it is not specific enough to gain a result. You need to fully explain the cause of the overstay at the earliest opportunity. 

Taxmanstakenallmydough

Thank you both very much!
No joy tracing landowner via Google so request to Land Registry would have to be way forward.
Could also phone restaurant for info but car park is separate from their own small car park so unlikely it’s there’s.
Whilst the parking charge has arisen as the expected time in the restaurant was exceeded because of their delays, I’d be very uncomfortable trying to land them with this (unfair) charge (if they aren’t the landowners), as restaurants have has such a very hard time over the last 18 months with Covid 😕
Whatever I do to resolve this, I will be writing to the local council & MP about the damage these ‘car park’ sharks are doing to the Local tourist industry (having read all the other posts about Fistral Beach, etc).
Thanks again for your advice!
👍🏻

Terry1931

The restaurant may have had some leverage against the landowner or even may have been the landowner, but now you confirm you didn't use the restaurants car park. You used a carpark away from the restaurant, what were the terms of use of that car park. 
Were patrons of other business permitted to use your carpark. 

Was even your permitted time of use of said carpark within it's terms and conditions 

These parking charges are not always without justification, they are often there to prevent abuse by clients of a  competing business.

If you cannot pursue this leverage the PCN will stick unless a technicality is established and you will be asked to pay the rate as per the terms and conditions.