ParkingEye overstay parking Charge.

DCBLPCNClaim

I'm appealing a ParkingEye overstage charge on behalf of my parents. 
Following the Newbies thread, I have complained to the landowner. In the meantime, I'm also going to send an appeal to Parkingeye. 

The maximum stay at the car park was 2 hours. The ANPR cameras have the car leaving after 2:10:01 (i.e. 10 minutes and 1 second). Am I correct that I can appeal under the BPA grace period rules? As far as I understand, the grace period should be at least 10 minutes, and BPA code of practice puts it at 11 minutes.
I was also going to use the unreliability of ANPR argument. 

Would this be adequate at the appeals stage? If so I will attach a copy of my appeal below before sending it. 

Thankyou in advance.

Coupon-mad

BPA code of practice puts it at 11 minutes.

It doesn't. It's a MINIMUM ten minutes but a PCN alleging 'overstay' based on 10 minutes one second is clearly capable of being called a scam.

ANPR in/out cameras are NOT synchronised with each other to the second.  Some have been shown to be as much as 3 minutes out with each other!

Shame on ParkingEye, who know full well that the new incoming statutory CoP (temporarily stalled by calculated actions by the Parking firms including ParkingEye, so not yet law) says that there MUST in future be a 5 minute minimum consideration period on arrival PLUS a minimum ten minute grace period to leave (both added together).

Sharp practice to ignore the new incoming Code, IMHO.  Tell the landowner about this too.  A cynic might bet that PE probably won't have told their clients about the new Code...

Are your parents elderly or disabled? Any medical condition that causes them to be a little slower to shop/get about, that affects their daily life?

DCBLPCNClaim

LBCCC came in this week. I have written the following appeal to send to parkingeye. To answer CM question above, yes. The registered keep had recently left the hospital for an ear infection so bad, it rendered him deaf in his left ear. Significant balance issues came with this infection, meaning he was signed off from work for over 2 months. I have drafted the following appeal. Let me know if anything should be changed. Thanks in advance. In the meantime, I will follow the Newbies thread and submit the SAR.

Re PCN number: 

 

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 decline your invitation to pay or name the driver, neither of which are required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. This is my appeal and all liability to your company is denied on the following basis:

 

Grace Period: BPA Code of Practise – non-compliance.

 

The BPA’s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.

 

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) states that:

 

“Your approach to parking management must allow a driver who enters your car park but decides not to park, to leave the car park within a reasonable period without having their vehicle issued with a parking charge notice.”

 

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.2) states that:

 

“You should allow the driver a reasonable ‘grace period’ in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.”

 

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.4) states that:

 

“You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.”

 

BPA’s Code of Practice (18.5) states that:

 

“If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.”

 

The BPA Code of Practice (13.4) clearly states that the Grace Period to leave the car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. Whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (it should be made clear - a contract was never entered in to), it is reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace period stipulated in 13.4 is also a “reasonable grace period” to apply to 13.1 and 13.2 of the BPA’s Code of Practice.

Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking Association (BPA):

 

 “The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket.”

 

 “No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”

 

 

Finally, some 7 years ago years ago, on 30th July 2015, the minutes of the Professional Development & Standards Board meeting show that it was formally agreed by the Board (of BPA members and stakeholders) that the minimum grace period would be changed in 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice to read 'a minimum of eleven minutes':

 

“Implications of the 10 minute grace period were discussed and the Board agreed with suggestion by AH that the clause should comply with DfT guidelines in the English book of by-laws to encourage a single standard. Board agreed that as the guidelines state that grace periods need to exceed 10 minutes clause 13.4 should be amended to reflect a mandatory 11 minute grace period.”

 

The recommendation reads:

 

“Reword Clause 13.4 to ‘If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 11 minutes.”

(Source: http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/Meeting%20Notes/Governan ce/20150730_PDandS_Board_Action_Notes.pdf)

 

This shows that the intention of stating vaguely: 'a minimum of ten minutes' in the current BPA CoP (not a maximum - a minimum requirement) means to any reasonable interpretation that seconds are de minimis and therefore not taken 3 into account – certainly an allegation of under eleven minutes (as is the case here) is perfectly reasonable.

 

As stated earlier in this section, whilst 13.4 does not apply in this case (as a contract was never entered in to), it is not unreasonable to suggest that clarification of this time period in relation to 13.4 also goes some way to clarifying the terms “reasonable period” and “reasonable grace period” stated in 13.1 and 13.2 respectively of the BPA’s Code of Practice. If the BPA feel “a minimum of 11 minutes” is a reasonable time period to leave a car park after a period of parking, it stands to reason that at least the same period of time is reasonable to also enter a car park, locate (and read) terms and conditions.

 

It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question (which Parkingeye claims was 10 minutes 01 second) is not an unreasonable grace period, given: a) The registered keeper of this vehicle had recently left a four-night stay in hospital for an ear infection which was so severe, that it rendered him deaf in the left ear and signed off work until 2023 due to significant balance and walking issues. b) The lack of sufficient signage throughout the car park in question (noncompliance with BPA Code of Practice 18.3) and the impact of that upon time taken to locate signage prior to entering a contract. When considered alongside point (a), it should be assumed that additional time should be allowed for people with less mobility to locate (and read) terms and conditions. c) No evidence has been provided to show that the ANPR cameras are synced with each other. It cannot, therefore, be assumed that the times displayed on the pictures taken are correct.

Coupon-mad

That is far too long.  Don't use template wording.

Don't word it like an 'appeal'.  

Obviously start with a more formal intro, by referring to the LBCCC and their ref.

"The BPA’s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at the end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start."

It doesn't!

That is not what I told you about consideration and grace periods in the incoming NEW STATUTORY CoP... the Government one! Why refer to the almost defunct old self-serving BPA CoP? 

Start again and refer to the LBCCC and tell PE you have complained to their client which runs this retail park because (then talk about the occupants of the car being elderly and any ailments that slowed then down).

Show us the new draft.  A new one.

A proper (concise!) formal email, starting 'Dear Sirs' and ending 'Yours Faithfully' that says it like it is, and doesn't use any template.

And of course complain again to the retail park (assuming this was a shopping park).

DCBLPCNClaim

I have drafted the following. Please let me know what you think. 

Dear Sirs,

 

I’m writing to you today regarding PCN number xxxxxxx and the subsequent Letter before Country Court Caim form issued for VRM XXXXXXXX.

The initial PCN alleges that the vehicle entered the cark park at Churchill Way Retail Park, Leyland, at XXXXXXX on 25/11/2022 and left at XXXXXXX, meaning the vehicle was in the car park for 2 hours, 10 minutes, and 1 second according to your own ANPR cameras.

 

It must be noted that, only a few weeks prior to the alleged incident, the registered keeper of this vehicle who is 64 years old had recently left a four-night stay in hospital for an ear infection that was so severe, that it rendered him deaf in the left ear and signed off work until 2023 due to significant balance and walking issues. Therefore, the registered keeper needs significantly more time than the average person to park the car and read and consider the signage.

As you are well aware, the Governments new Private Parking Code Of Practice states that the consideration period must be at least 5 minutes upon arrival, followed by a 10-minute grace period on exit.

Furthermore, it’s clear from the images provided that ANPR cameras captured the timestamps of these images. As you will be well aware, some of these ANPR cameras have been shown to be as much as 3 minutes out from each other.

If we consider the poor health of the registered keeper at the time, along with the inaccuracy of ANPR cameras and the Governments Private Parking Code of Practise which allows for 15 minutes of grace time, I request that this PCN is canceled and no further action is taken.

Alongside this appeal, I will be submitting a very similar email to the land owner as well as my local MP to let them know of your predatory practices.

 

Yours Faithfully,

 

XXXXXXXX

Coupon-mad

Typos:

Caim should be claim and remove the word 'form' because it's just a letter you have so far.

Practise should be Practice

Canceled should be cancelled.

I think I'd add at the end:

Even if you are only allowing the minimum ten minutes' (set in the current self-serving BPA CoP), are you seriously telling me, my MP, your client landowner and potentially a Judge, that you think it is acceptable to threaten and then sue elderly persons and demand a 3 figure sum, for taking allegedly ONE SECOND too long to leave in queuing traffic past your hidden exit trap?

Even if your system is synchronised to the second (which these ANPR camera systems are not) are you serious in your belief that this is a breach of contract and a fair charge to throw at a vulnerable but genuine patron consumer?  The keeper's data should never have been requested from the DVLA.  You had no 'reasonable cause' excuse, let alone a cause of action.

I expect this atrocious PCN to be cancelled immediately after you have reviewed it.

Coupon-mad

BTW you can't send it in your name.