Parallel Parking Ltd Parking Charge for Lease car and have received an LBCCC

hop_skotcher

Hi All,

I have read over the Newbies thread and with all the great information in there, I'm a little confused what my options are and was hoping someone reading this thread might be able to help. 
Hand up that after reading the Newbies thread, I've already made so many mistakes thinking these companies and the relevant 'independent' associations operated fairly and indeed impartially.

Anyhow, I received a PCN from Parallel Parking Ltd's (PP) GS Car Park on Mansfield Street, Leicester, LE1 3DL (adding the full address so other people searching Google can easily find this for the future) ... This particular PCN was on the basis I didn't pay the £1.50 charge for 30 minutes parking on 24th July 2021 at 15:00, whereas I did in fact pay for the parking, unfortunately by cash.
The problem was that when the ticket was printed, I'd noticed there was an additional digit/character preceding my vehicle registration number (VRN).
I immediately tried to call them on the contact number displayed on the parking board - with no answer on both occasions. 

On 29th July 2021, PP Ltd issued a Notice to Keeper to the lease company Hitachi Fleet who'd originally owned the vehicle.
On 19th August 2021, Hitachi responded back to PP Ltd providing the details of the company who I'm guessing managed the car since I have it on lease.
On 26th August 2021, PP Ltd issued a Notice to Hirer to company we'd leased the car from.
On 10th September 2021, the company responded providing the details of the owner of the car - my husband... Since it'd been so long, I'd thrown away the ticket stub :-/
On 15th September 2021, PP Ltd then issued a Notice to Driver to my husband.
We appealed this on 19th September via PP Ltd's appeal process - we never heard anything back...
Then on  27th September 2021, PP Ltd issued me with the Notice to Driver
With a followup Notice to Driver Reminder being sent on 26th October 2021

On 1st November 2021, we then contacted PP Ltd via their email address - enquiries@parallelparkingltd.co.uk, to followup on the appeal and also request redacted details of the PDT and ANPR systems.
PP Ltd responded the day after saying they'd manually checked and found no minor typing errors.
PP Ltd pointed out on 14th November 2021 that they'd passed the details onto Gladstone Solicitors and future correspondence should be with them.

On the 22nd November we received the 'Letter before Claim' (LBCCC) from Gladstone Solicitors stating that in accordance with the PAP, we should decide within the next 30 days if we wanted to Pay the now £170 debt or dispute it... To our shock, only 7 days later, Gladstone Solicitors emailed me 'inviting' me to make payment and using what I can only describe as 'scare tactics' through the use of terms like Court Proceedings etc to make the payment within 7 days.

Up until this point, I didn't even know there was an alternative dispute resolution scheme, which was being operated by IAS.
I raised an enquiry with the IAS about our PCN but because it'd fallen outside of the 21 days period of appeal they informed us that we'd have to go through a Non-Standard Appeal.
Prior to speaking to my son and then reading these forums I naively thought these alternative schemes like IAS and POPLA were truly independent and operated to protect private parking operators from ripping off people...So I paid the £15 to get the non-standard appeal (NSA)!

Having now read the Newbies thread, I see this was a BIG mistake... So I'm not sure whether I have any options open to me at this point, since the IAS stated when raising this NSA, that their adjudication decision was 'binding'... Not even sure what that means??

Anyhow, we're awaiting the adjudication for the NSA.
Our 30 days from the date of LBCCC finishes on the Wed 22nd December 2021.
Now following the Newbie thread, I raised a SAR on 14th December 2021 against PP Ltd to see what data they had.
At this stage, they've simply provided the various notices, a screenshot that says "No Records Found" for the time period 24th July 2021 03:34 through to 25th July 2021 03:34 against our VRN - I'm not sure what system this query is against, but the result doesn't surprise me, since my entire argument is that the VRN displayed incorrectly.

Following further correspondence with PP Ltd from this SAR, they stated that because we entered the VRN incorrectly we were in Breach of Contract... I'm actually quite shocked and upset that people would use a genuine typo as a cause of 'breach of contract', especially as it was not deliberate.
PP Ltd stated  they have signs, which highlights that customers must ensure they provide a full and accurate VRN as part of their T&Cs.
They also mentioned that whilst they saw my call logs on the day - their centres aren't open on Saturdays and that I should have called them on a weekday or emailed them.

It does seem extortionate to be faced with a £100 PCN (well £170 with the solicitor fees now), for a £1.50 parking charge that I definitely did pay for .... Definite note to self to always pay with card going forward, alongside taking photos of the ticket.

A similar case was already in our local Leicester Mercury newspaper.

I complained to my local MP, who contacted me saying they'd sent a letter to the parking operator - haven't heard anything since.
I also complained to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) on Gladstone Solicitors for their behaviour - namely on their email pushing us to make payment - I just don't get, why they'd send us a letter saying we have 30 days to decide whether to pay or dispute, only to then email us 7 days letter stating we're not responding.

I've seen a lot of threads and the Newbie thread mention about contacting the Landowner... But a question from me, how do I actually find out who the landowner is??

I am expecting the IAS NS-Appeal to be rejected but keen to hear from others about whether I have a leg to stand on by pursuing this further??

Very annoyed at myself for naively thinking these organisations operated fairly as based on everything I've now read, it definitely seems like that's not the case.

Would really appreciate any help anyone can offer us.

Coupon-mad

Can you withdraw your IAS appeal? Is there a withdraw option?

Of course you have the usual legs to stand on. If you know there was a digit before the numberplate, email the PPC's data protection email and ask them to send you the machine log that shows your VRM plus a single digit error, because this includes your personal data.

D_P_Dance

Many judges regard incorrect VRNs in termanials/PDT machines as trivial, a wate oof court time.  Read this and complain t your MP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis

hop_skotcher

Thanks for your responses.

@Coupon-mad - unfortunately no withdrawal option for the NSA.

When I emailed the PPC previously they just kept saying 'they checked manually and there was no record of my number plate with an additional digit' ... I'll request it again as suggested.

Thanks for that link too @D_P_Dance - will keep this in mind for when the MP responds to me.

hop_skotcher

@Coupon-mad - if the IAS reject our NS-appeal, do you know if can we still fight to get this overturned I guess via the Courts?

[Though I really hope we can avoid this - becoming a little stressful just thinking about it all!]

Coupon-mad

The court will ignore a crap decision by the IPC's own (well-reported) kangaroo court that is being replaced by the Government in 2022 and only upholds 4% of appeals.  Judges are not stupid but you'd have to point out the issues and that you feel duped into paying £15 and will be including that in your actual costs in the case.

hop_skotcher

Noted - we've put together our evidence and made a list of all the issues in case it does come down to court.

In the LBCCC letter Gladstone sent us, they said we need to confirm whether we're paying or disputing the 'debt' by filling in an online form on their website.
Should we continue to follow their guidelines and complete this form?
[Note - my family and I have decided to continue to dispute this]

hop_skotcher

Also, would it work against us that whilst I did contact them on the day we parked... We forgot to contact them afterwards.
I didn't even notice they'd provided an email address though it was in small print.

Coupon-mad

Shouldn't matter.  

Should we continue to follow their guidelines and complete this form? 

Wait, 'Gladstones' and 'guidance' do not fit in the same sentence.

You need to know (if you didn't already) that the IPC trade body, the IAS and Gladstones shared Directors?

And the IPC's owner only stopped being a shareholder of Gladstones in 2020.  Companies House records, freely available in the public domain, show that and more.  This is the biggest conflict of interests that a Trade Body could have.

I think you know whose guidance you should follow and you are looking at her post right now.  See the NEWBIES thread.  Did you see me and @bargepole on Channel 5 's 'Parking Con?' The other week?  The regulars on this forum know what we are doing.

hop_skotcher

Definitely DID NOT know that! Wow that is a huge conflict of interest - thanks for bringing that to my attention.

Ahh yes, just re-read the Newbies thread and seen the bit about not replying to the LBCCC 'Reply Forms' ... OK will ignore that for now. As mentioned in the Newbies thread, I also did send a second mail to Gladstones to inform them that a SAR has been requested from the PPC.

Ha - yes I did watch that program.
Will keep you updated on when they get back to us, and again expecting the IAS to respond with a negative outcome.

Thanks for the help and support @Coupon-mad - appreciated.

hop_skotcher

@Coupon-mad... As suspected the IAS have just dismissed the appeal on the following grounds:

"
The terms of parking at the site are detailed in the signs at the location. The signs state parking must be paid for and motorists must enter their full and accurate vehicle registration mark (VRM). The signs go on to state that by parking or remaining at this site otherwise than in accordance with the terms the driver agrees to pay a parking charge.

The Appellant accepts that they did not enter their full VRM as they believe that the VRM on the ticket had a digit which was wrong, however they no longer have the ticket to produce.

As they did not enter their accurate VRM they became liable to pay the Parking Charge.

If a ticket was purchased and a different VRM was entered this is mitigation only. The IAS can only consider whether the Parking Charge has been issued lawfully or not. Only the Operator can consider points of mitigation.

I can see a number of clearly visible signs which would alert any motorists to the fact that terms and conditions apply to that area of land. Once sufficient notice is provided the onus is then on the motorist to read the signs in more detail to establish whether they agree to the terms. The signs were clearly sufficient to alert the Appellant to the terms because they were aware that they were required to pay for parking.

The Appellant has raised issues in terms of the Operator's alleged lack of compliance with the Protection of Freedoms Act. The Appellant accepts that they were the driver therefore the Operator does not need to pursue the Appellant as the Registered Keeper.

I have considered the issues raised by both parties in this Appeal and I am satisfied that the Parking Operator has established that the Parking Charge Notice was properly issued in accordance with the law and therefore this Appeal is dismissed.
"

Any advice on next steps?