Driver fined because landowner changed their mind on parking space

MFR123

Hi there, I hope you're all well

I've been reading the posts on this forum and I must say, you guys are the real MVP's with your helpful advice for anyone who needs it, more power to you all, sadly, I now need a bit of that advice and hence I am creating a new discussion (as per the forum advice):

Here's the rundown of what happened:

It is in a business park with Units:

A building had been left by a company as the company moved somewhere else. The building had been empty for a while so everyone at the driver's workplace had been parking there. Recently, a new owner bought it but they 'kindly' allowed the workers to use it's parking space whilst they were moving their things, the owner just said: 'Don't use the parking spaces immediately in front as the vans need to use them'. So the driver in question 'may have' parked in the space opposite (but definitely NOT in the one in front). That space was still owned by the business owner but thought they were allowed to thanks to the owner's 'kindness' as per the agreement (sadly by word of mouth not written).

Now, the keeper (me) has received a fine Parking notice from parallel parking ltd for £100.
Manager who the owner spoke to was shocked and sent an email to all staff saying: it seems the owner has changed his mind. The manager told everyone now to not to park their as other staff have now started to received PCN's from the company also.
Manager spoke to the owner who said: "signs are now up saying no parking allowed and they are clear", and that's that. But the parking notice is dated from BEFORE the manager sent out an email. 

They have behaved appallingly, they didn't even bother to give a notice to the staff that they're to no longer park in the owner's spaces.

To be fair, some staff still parked in the spot he said not to park in which may have set him off, but why not just let the staff know they were no longer allowed at least they would've had a head's up? Instead, they just let them park in their space KNOWING FULL WELL the agreement and then just sent a parking notice to the staff

Very appalling and unprofessional behaviour and really sad to see trust is an issue especially in these times, maybe he's now just trying to make a few quid from staff who took the owner for his word.

The driver's shift was at 7pm in the evening, and as we know it gets really dark now. Also, the picture taken is as if someone took it from 2 ft away. But the company is claiming it was via 'CCTV', but in the picture, there is no evidence which shows it was 'their' parking space and the driver doesn't even recall parking in the space so this is an avenue to be pursued. Furthermore, the signs are quite small but they're placed all around the perimeter. 
The signs say CCTV/ANPR in operation 24/7 and it has IAS; IPCN; ICO written.

The notice was via post. It's dated for 13 oct

Just to confirm, I should appeal and complain firstly? To whom?

Many Thanks!

MFR123

'I wrote landowner' but its the business who owns the building and the parking spaces, not sure if there might be a difference in the business park...

MFR123

UPDATE: 
The General Manager has sent an email although he said part of him didn't want to do so as he was so shocked at the owner especially after what he did:

The owner says he is willing to 'rent' the parking spaces from 6pm to 7am weekdays and all weekend, during which time the spaces are ALL EMPTY anyway... it seems this owner just wants to make money any way that he can, but I guess its his right to do so...
The time of the fine was 7pm, but the fact the owner is willing to 'rent' the space after 6pm indicates he is not in need of it at that time, so can a case be made that there was no 'loss of earnings here as well' since he's willing to rent it at this time anyway?

Coupon-mad

I think that last part is not relevant.

YOU ALL HAD A VERBAL CONTRACT.

All of you should write witness statements explaining what the landowner allowed you all to do and stating that you relied upon that verbal agreement, and did not accept any terms on an odd sign that quietly appeared on a wall that is unlit in the dark.

Get photos in the same light conditions.  NOT close ups of any signs, longer views and/or a video and all of you must appeal.

Then appeal at the 2nd stage ('futilely go through the motions') to the kangaroo court (by all accounts over the years) of the IAS. 

You all need to go into this farce with your eyes wide open and know that only allowed 4% of appeals last year, according to the IAS 'Lead adjudicator's own report.

He said this like it's a good thing; I think the spin they like to put on it, is that their 'audited' signs are so damn good (LOL) that there are hardly any cases where their paymasters, the fee-paying IPC members slip up with evidence...yeah, right...

Any reasonable person would be forgiven for considering it woeful.

Anyway go thru the motions.  Meanwhile, those who have fallen victim to this farce, this trap, should approach your MPs and ask the MP to please write a complaint on your behalf to the new owner, asking why he apparently reneged on his kind verbal agreement and why he didn't just tell the neighbouring business that from x date, enforcement and £100 parking charges would apply.

The pressure of an MP's letter or two, if the employees live in different constituencies, might focus his mind to cancel the first PCNs and accept that his kind offer was a contract and to undo that, he needed to have a conversation or send a timely email/letter warning of the proposed changes.

Even if the MPs' letters don't get PCNs cancelled, the communication trail could prove very useful as evidence later on, if the PPC decides to have a small claim punt.

Tell your colleagues all of the above and if any if them think about paying these fake fines 'for an easy life' ... aaarghghh!  ...they would be sponsoring a rogue industry and funding more PCNs against less well informed victims.  Nor something this forum would condone.

We fight for change and we are seeing change next year, if the DLUHC get the new statutory Code of Practice and framework right (which they hadn't, at the point of the August technical consultation, but the public has hopefully made them rethink their errors).  We hope for real improvements in conduct and signage as a clear and proper deterrent, not small print on a wall in the dark.

Right now, private parking firms are out of control and not to be paid.

MFR123

Hi there, Thank you for the reply

Just so I know what I'm doing here:

I have had a NTK posted so I appeal online straight away right? The appeal website was: "parallelzatappeal". 

So I should appeal but AS THE KEEPER, correct?

What reasons could I have at my disposal? And what should I certainly mention?

Also, 'client landowner', is that the business on whose area the driver would've parked? No use complaining to him, then, as he's quite alright with the fine...

Jenni_D

Yourself and all the driver's colleagues would benefit from dropping the F word ... it is not and never could be a Fine, it's merely an invoice for an alleged breach of contractual terms and conditions - so a civil matter.

Appeal using the blue template from the NEWBIES (within the appeal window timeframe), and when that is rejected appeal to IAS. In readiness for the IAS appeal get photos/videos of the location showing how poor the signs are. Also check if the NTK is POFA-compliant - if it's not then that'll be one of your appeal points (and defence points should it ever get to a court claim).

Edit: I tried to look at the PPL website but it's blocked by my employer's firewall. 🤣

D_P_Dance

It is not a fine, please read the newbies.  Have you  complained to your MP?

MFR123

I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE POINTS OF REFLECTION AFTER READING THE TEMPLATE: SQUARE BRACKETS ARE THE QUOTED PASSAGES OF INTEREST AND CAP LOCK IS MY OWN WRITING:
---------------------------------------------------------------
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"] 

THE LANDOWOWNER IS FINE WITH THE "FINE"

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

[Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.]

THE IMAGES OF A CLOSE UP OF THE SIGN AND CAR ARE ON THE WEBSITE ONCE I INPUT THE REF NUM AND CAR REG. 

[If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.]

I DONT THINK THIS APPLIES TO MY SITUATION

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

THIS SEEMS RELEVANT AS THE GRACE PERIOD IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE LETTER:
---------------------------------------------------------------
STEPS TO TAKE:

1. Appeal on the website within the period allowed
2. If its rejected then appeal for the second time to the IAS the "kangaroo court", mostly likely it will get rejected here also
3. Next step is witness statements, gathering evidence and getting ready for court

Is this how it would go?

MFR123

Yes an invoice not a fine, I was using it rather loosley, 'invoice' from now onwards... unless I forget

Jenni_D

You're free to edit the template as suits ... just be very careful not to reword things in a way that could identify the driver, or yourself as the driver (especially if you weren't). So no me, myself or I.

MFR123

If I end up going to court, will there be court fees?