Surrounding Car-parks Different Companies Monitoring Query

20vt-rs

Hi all,

I have been served with a PCN from a company that their cameras show I entered and exited 15 mins over the agreed stay, however I think this happened as I drove through their car park to use another car park, which is monitored by another firm. I am going to appeal using the standard template on the newbies thread, would it be sensible to add this at the end:

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner. Furthermore, if surrounding land car-parks are managed by other parties, please provide evidence that the vehicle in question did or did not park on their land.

I read that the template does not need changing, but I think this is relevant for me, is this ok to add at the end and use the full template? The car park I used I was within their timeframe by a lot, but drove through this other car park who issued me with the PCN to enter and exit. Hoping this all makes sense!

Thank you.

Fruitcake

Send the template and add the one liner, but I wouldn't ask them to prove a negative. Only tell then to prove that the car was parked in the car park they monitor, and state that it was parked elsewhere. If they used ANPR, they will not be able to prove where the car was parked.

It will help if you have proof yourself that the car was parked elsewhere, such as dashcam footage, PDT tickets, or smart 'phone location tracking.

What is the name of the PPC that issued the PCN? Please also tell us the location as it may have cropped up before. I am aware of at least one car park where motorists have to drive through it to get to a different car park.

Have you checked that the NTK was PoFA compliant?

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

Have you complained to your MP yet?

KeithP

Can I suggest you perform some pretty hasty edits to your most recent post?
In my opinion, there is too much use of the word 'I'.

In your second sentence, perhaps it should say something like...
...I can amend to ask them to prove the vehicle was parked there...

Similarly, in the second paragraph...
...I do not have dashcam or proof the vehicle parked elsewhere...

The parking companies trawl this forum just waiting for people to trip themselves up and it really is unwise to give clues to the driver's identity.

20vt-rs

KeithP said:

Can I suggest you perform some pretty hasty edits to your most recent post?
In my opinion, there is too much use of the word 'I'.

In your second sentence, perhaps it should say something like...
...I can amend to ask them to prove the vehicle was parked there...

Similarly, in the second paragraph...
...I do not have dashcam or proof the vehicle parked elsewhere...

The parking companies trawl this forum just waiting for people to trip themselves up and it really is unwise to give clues to the driver's identity.

Post deleted thanks!

20vt-rs

Fruitcake said:

Send the template and add the one liner, but I wouldn't ask them to prove a negative. Only tell then to prove that the car was parked in the car park they monitor, and state that it was parked elsewhere. If they used ANPR, they will not be able to prove where the car was parked.

It will help if you have proof yourself that the car was parked elsewhere, such as dashcam footage, PDT tickets, or smart 'phone location tracking.

What is the name of the PPC that issued the PCN? Please also tell us the location as it may have cropped up before. I am aware of at least one car park where motorists have to drive through it to get to a different car park.

Have you checked that the NTK was PoFA compliant?

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

Have you complained to your MP yet?

Thanks, I will review and submit my appeal I was wondering if it was wise to state the car was parked elsewhere given the template states there will be no admission as to who was driving.

KeithP

20vt-rs said:

KeithP said:

Can I suggest you perform some pretty hasty edits to your most recent post?
In my opinion, there is too much use of the word 'I'.

In your second sentence, perhaps it should say something like...
...I can amend to ask them to prove the vehicle was parked there...

Similarly, in the second paragraph...
...I do not have dashcam or proof the vehicle parked elsewhere...

The parking companies trawl this forum just waiting for people to trip themselves up and it really is unwise to give clues to the driver's identity.

Post deleted thanks!

That wasn't necessary. Why did you do that?

Fruitcake

20vt-rs said:

Fruitcake said:

Send the template and add the one liner, but I wouldn't ask them to prove a negative. Only tell then to prove that the car was parked in the car park they monitor, and state that it was parked elsewhere. If they used ANPR, they will not be able to prove where the car was parked.

It will help if you have proof yourself that the car was parked elsewhere, such as dashcam footage, PDT tickets, or smart 'phone location tracking.

What is the name of the PPC that issued the PCN? Please also tell us the location as it may have cropped up before. I am aware of at least one car park where motorists have to drive through it to get to a different car park.

Have you checked that the NTK was PoFA compliant?

What happened when you complained to the landowner?

Have you complained to your MP yet?

Thanks, I will review and submit my appeal I was wondering if it was wise to state the car was parked elsewhere given the template states there will be no admission as to who was driving.

The two are not related. Saying "the car was parked elsewhere" does not in any way reveal the driver's identity.

20vt-rs

KeithP said:

20vt-rs said:

KeithP said:

Can I suggest you perform some pretty hasty edits to your most recent post?
In my opinion, there is too much use of the word 'I'.

In your second sentence, perhaps it should say something like...
...I can amend to ask them to prove the vehicle was parked there...

Similarly, in the second paragraph...
...I do not have dashcam or proof the vehicle parked elsewhere...

The parking companies trawl this forum just waiting for people to trip themselves up and it really is unwise to give clues to the driver's identity.

Post deleted thanks!

That wasn't necessary. Why did you do that?

It gave too many details, I summarised the question I had above to Fruitcake.

20vt-rs

Hi all - Just a follow up on this thread, I appealed using the template recommended,  and that was rejected today on the following basis:

 The car park is operated by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR).

 Cameras capture an image of vehicles entering and leaving the car park and calculate their

length of stay on site.

 When purchasing a pay and display ticket, you must enter the correct vehicle registration

number (VRM) and this information is directed to the camera system.

 I can confirm that no pay and display ticket matching your VRM was purchased at the time of

the terms and conditions.

 The signage is clear, a valid pay and display ticket must be purchased for the full duration of

your stay on the car park.

 I can confirm the parking charge notice was issued correctly and remains payable.

 Euro Car Parks do not need to provide evidence of who was driving the vehicle, it is the

registered keeper’s responsibility to inform of the full name and address within 28 days

beginning with the day after the notice was given. If the full amount remains unpaid, under

Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (‘the Act’), Euro Car Parks have the right

subject of the Act to recover from the keeper of the vehicle at the time it was parked so much

of that amount which remains unpaid.

 We note that in your letter you state that the parking charge notice (PCN) is not enforceable

as you have currently not entered into a ‘contract’ with Euro Car Parks. I would respectfully

remind that contract law applies in this instance.

 The car park is private property and signage on entrance and within the private car park

clearly set out the rules and regulations of the car park and tariffs (if applicable). By entering

the car park, parking and leaving the vehicle the driver has accepted the ‘contract’ and

therefore if the driver fail to comply with the terms and conditions a parking charge notice will

be correctly issued.

This looks like a standard reply set of items I think, in my first letter I asked for evidence, close up photographs of the signs and images of the vehicle parked, this has not come through. There is no grace period noted either, does this look ok to appeal?

I am now going to do some research as to how I should appeal via POPLA, but one thing I am unsure about is remaining to not disclose who was driving, if I appeal and have to comment / describe what happened, do I just not mention who was driving? Do I assume I was passenger? 

I visited the site today to check things out, there are three cameras, one on the entrance, one on exit and another on entrance to the back of the carpark... I went through two entrance cameras to reach the destination car park, which I think may have caused this confusion. But I am assuming here, I do not know how the cameras work or trigger. I also noticed that there is a 30min free stay where they state I was parked, but in the car park I used it is 3 hours!

Thanks...

Umkomaas

I am now going to do some research as to how I should appeal via POPLA, but one thing I am unsure about is remaining to not disclose who was driving, if I appeal and have to comment / describe what happened, do I just not mention who was driving? Do I assume I was passenger?

If the ECP Notice to Keeper is PoFA-compliant, it's irrelevant who was driving, they can hold the keeper liable. If that's the case, appealing as the driver gives far more credibility to comments about the dual car park and the confusion caused. 

20vt-rs

Umkomaas said:

I am now going to do some research as to how I should appeal via POPLA, but one thing I am unsure about is remaining to not disclose who was driving, if I appeal and have to comment / describe what happened, do I just not mention who was driving? Do I assume I was passenger?

If the ECP Notice to Keeper is PoFA-compliant, it's irrelevant who was driving, they can hold the keeper liable. If that's the case, appealing as the driver gives far more credibility to comments about the dual car park and the confusion caused. 

Ok thanks, I am just checking info I found over on parkingcowboys...

First one I see is this:

Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Failure to comply with paragraph 6 means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver.

• Which car the ticket relates to
• What land the car was parked on
• The period the car was parked
• Advise that the driver is liable for the parking charge and the amount and that it has not been paid in full
• State whether a notice to the driver was given either to the driver or placed on the vehicle and if so to repeat the information in that notice about paying the parking charge and when
• Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover, and of the dispute resolution arrangements
• Invite the registered keeper to pay the outstanding parking charge or, if he was not the driver,  to provide the name and address of the driver and to pass a copy of the notice on to that driver
• Identify the “creditor” who is legally entitled to recover the parking charge
• Warn the keeper that if the parking charges remains outstanding after 28 days and the name and address of the driver has not been given, or otherwise known to the person entitled to the parking charge,  that “creditor” will be entitled to recover the parking charge from the registered keeper.
• Details of the discount for payment within 14 days,   The Discount should be at least 40% of the full charge under the BPA Code of Practice (applies to BPA Members only)
• Date of the notice

There are 5 car parks on the land they mention, the NTK does not mention which car park I was parked in, it just genralises the area. But the other car parks are looked after by other companies by all accounts also (e.g MET look after another). Do they need to confirm exactly where they think I parked?