Received a Parking Charge For Misunderstanding an ANPR System - Do I Have to Pay?

avocia

So this is a weird one, I've parked in plenty of ANPR controlled carparks before and they all seem to work in exactly the same way; 

• Enter Carpark, Exit Car
• Go do your shopping or whatever, return to carpark
• Enter your registration on the keypad (or drive up to the barrier if you're in a fancier one)
• The amount owed on that registration at that time is displayed
• You pay, you leave

In August last year, I parked in one such car park in Walsall - one operated by Euro Car Parks which I have never parked in before. I went to the cinema, came out ~2hrs 45 mins later, typed reg, paid, left. I then got a parking fine saying I had not purchased a ticket which covered my time in the car park. This is where it gets weird. So first of all, it seems that this particular car park wanted you to enter the reg upon entering the car park. Kind of contrary to what an ANPR system exists for if you have to predict how long you'll be there in such an old fashioned way, but then it gets really bad. So I came out and entered my reg as I was leaving, it displayed a charge of £1.50 on the screen which I paid (and I still have this physical ticket on me.)

As it turns out, not only was I supposed to purchase the ticket on entering, but I was supposed to cycle through a menu and select my own charge. I mean seriously, this system seems designed to specifically catch out people who are familiar with ANPR car parks and expect the machine to calculate all this for you. What is the purpose of number plate recognition if the machine doesn't even know when you entered the car park? 

Anyway, it seems that the time I bought the ticket wasn't an issue, the issue was that the ticket purchased only covered 2 hours of parking, not the 2hrs 45 I was there. Because I had expected the machine to know how long I'd been there, I didn't realise I had to cycle through the charges and pick the appropriate one. So when I received the PCN, I appealed and offered to pay the full price of the original ticket I should have purchased (in lieu of the £1 I actually owed them) to apologise for the misunderstanding. I thought this was reasonable given that I did purchase a ticket, and this carpark really does not follow normal practices. They rejected this, and are now threatening me with court action with letter after letter.

Given that;

• I did purchase a ticket (albeit one that did not cover the full stay)
• This system is contrary to all other ANPR systems I've ever seen
• I offered to pay the cost of the ticket as a good will gesture
• I can evidence all of the above with a paper trail

If I was to let this go to court, do you think a reasonable judge would side with me here? With this whole energy crisis I really cannot afford the £170 they're now asking from me, I can't even afford whatever the original cost of the ticket was. It was an honest mistake, and I really need some options here.

Thanks in advance.

Redx

Other than plan A in the newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum in announcements ( a landowner cancellation or managing agent cancellation ) , only a judge can decide

A loss in court is less than £200 , so not much different

Most p & D car parks I have seen are pay on entry , not exit ( although I have known ones like you describe , so that is why a motorist should ALWAYS read signs , and comply , any sign , anywhere , anytime )

Had you paid for the total time on site , you might have a case , but I suspect that unless you can convince a judge about what happened and why , you may struggle , they may decide that it's bilking

£70 of that £170 is a debt collector charge , which the government said should not be added ( yesterday's announcement )

avocia

Redx said:

Other than plan A in the newbies FAQ sticky thread near the top of the forum in announcements ( a landowner cancellation or managing agent cancellation ) , only a judge can decide

A loss in court is less than £200 , so not much different

Most p & D car parks I have seen are pay on entry , not exit ( although I have known ones like you describe , so that is why a motorist should ALWAYS read signs , and comply , any sign , anywhere , anytime )

Had you paid for the total time on site , you might have a case , but I suspect that unless you can convince a judge about what happened and why , you may struggle , they may decide that it's bilking

£70 of that £170 is a debt collector charge , which the government said should not be added ( yesterday's announcement )

This is my point, it isn't a pay and display car park. It's an ANPR car park with no attendants or enforcement officers. Most of these systems work the way I described (in fact, every single one I've ever seen personally aside from this one works the way I described). It is as if this car park has been designed to make the method of payment as obscure as possible so as to collect as many fines as possible. Given that I attempted to correct my error at the earliest opportunity, surely a judge would be sympathetic to this.

Redx

You would have to ask a judge , not us ! We are not allowed to give legal advice on here , you pay a lawyer for that !

Anpr or otherwise , around here in the northwest , plus many others , it's pay on entry  , guess , and display , very few are pay on exit ,, even council ones , so are the opposite of your experience but similar to this saga of yours

Had the signs been read , instead of relying on assumptions , it probably would not have happened

We shall have to agree to disagree

fisherjim

avocia said:

Most of these systems work the way I described

Sorry, have to agree with Redx with this, the majority I have seen are pay on entry, and that's why the COP's give a ridiculous  grace time to enter, find a space, find the pay machine, understand the T&C's and pay for your estimated time on site.

Of course it's unfair unjust and a scam that's exactly how PPC's make millions.

You cannot in any way assume anything with parking these days even if you have been to the site before, the unscrupulous Muppets try it on all the time.

Your choice now if you fight the idiots or pay up.

Coupon-mad

But don't pay up!  ECP are not at all litigious.

The Government agrees with you.  Technology should not set motorists up to fail.

Read the new Code of Practice AND the Explanatory document too, published this week, where if talks about ANPR being fit for purpose and in another section about keying errors, that technology must work in the interests of motorists and that's why the Govt has decided keying errors must equal cancellation. 

Are you at POPLA code stage?

Have you exhausted PLAN A from the NEWBIES thread?

Have you read bargepole's new thread about the new Code of Practice?

avocia

Coupon-mad said:

But don't pay up!  ECP are not at all litigious.

The Government agrees with you.  Technology should not set motorists up to fail.

Read the new Code of Practice AND the Explanatory document too, published this week, where if talks about ANPR being fit for purpose and in another section about keying errors, that technology must work in the interests of motorists and that's why the Govt has decided keying errors must equal cancellation. 

Are you at POPLA code stage?

Have you exhausted PLAN A from the NEWBIES thread?

Have you read bargepole's new thread about the new Code of Practice?

At this stage it's been given to a collector - Debt Recovery Plus. Think I got 2 letters in the past week, maybe one or 2 before that. I don't believe I've contacted them or acknowledged the letters (I can't find any emails or call logs indicating I have). So I imagine they're a little more litigious, but yeah having an ANPR system while using an old style pay-on-entry method seems specifically designed to catch people out. Never seen another car park like it. 

I haven't read the thread about the new Code of Practice but I will do that now. Thanks! 

D_P_Dance

Have you read this

https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/18/surrey-writing-on-womans-jumper-landed-couple-with-fine-when-she-walked-in-bus-lane-15439916/

ANPR systems are banned in council car parks for this reason.  

Coupon-mad

DRPlus are not litigious! They can't sue, they are timewaster debt crawlers who cannot now add false sums to parking charges.

As well as reading bargepole's thread about the new Code of Practice and highlights, please read the 4th reply in the NEWBIES thread.