Pub car park

Down_On_My_Luck_2023

Received a Parking Charge Notice from CEL for parking in a pub car park without entering my reg into the system. Had my first appeal refused (of course), and now wondering whether it’s worth pursuing further. I have read the newbie posts on here, but I couldn’t quite find the same circumstances, so forgive me for creating a new post.

We had a poorly child over the festive period, and were looking for a pharmacy that was open (hospital was at breaking point). Found one in a nearby village, dropped my partner off, and then turned into a nearby (closed) pub car park to turn the car around and wait for my partner. It was dark, it was raining, my mind was on my child’s health and I didn’t see the warning signs. I didn’t ‘park up’ properly but instead just ‘hovered’, with the engine running. My partner was a bit longer than expected due to the pharmacist writing a letter to my child’s doctor and from start to finish we were there 13 minutes, according to the ANPR.

I tried appealing to the landlord of the pub but they didn’t want to know (“plenty of signs” “third party company, not our responsibility” etc.) and my appeal to CEL was predictably unsuccesful. I’ve since been back to check the signage and from what I can tell it’s clear enough (although I don’t really know what I’m looking for). So I’m not really sure what else to appeal on, as the stressful circumstances we were under don’t seem to count for anything. Any suggestions?

fisherjim

Down_On_My_Luck_2023 said:

I’ve since been back to check the signage and from what I can tell it’s clear enough (although I don’t really know what I’m looking for). So I’m not really sure what else to appeal on, as the stressful circumstances we were under don’t seem to count for anything. Any suggestions?

Yes but did you check the signage in the dark or daylight there obviously was a big difference as you said you didn't see the warning signs on the day night.

You should have gone back at night and taken dated photos of the car park to show the poor signage and use this along with the other points at the POPLA appeal.

If you had taken in the newbies thread correctly you would have noted that you don't need a specific case identical to yours the process is basically the same for all these scam charges.

Wonka_2

You're reminding me of a local issue in the next village to us - local pub has a limited car park and no on-street parking so pharmacy visitors have chosen to start taking the proverbial and filling their car park. Pub bring in parking operator and make it clear on social media/in local area that anyone buying a drink is welcome to park and register their vehicle but pharmacy visitors still choose to 'hover' and block the car park (despite Doctors surgery car park only 20mtrs further away that owns the (off-site) pharmacy)

Pub landlord gets abuse from non-customers so he asks parking company to double down efforts on this abusing his generosity

@Down_On_My_Luck_2023 if it's the same place then good luck - I believe the landlord is up for the fight and they haven't lost a case on the site yet 

Down_On_My_Luck_2023

Thanks fisherjim, knew I could count on a passive-aggressive response! Yes, I have taken in the newbies thread as best I can, and yes, I noticed the FAQ about identical cases, but I only came across this forum after I had complained to the establishment and submitted my initial appeal, so I've already admitted liability and not been able to follow most of the advice on the newbie thread. I was just wondering if anyone saw grounds for a further appeal. For example, would a medical emergency carry any weight?

And yes, I went back at night under similar conditions and there are plenty of signs. Unless there are certain requirements for the signs that they might not have followed (wording, size etc.) I don't think I can use this excuse. My mind was on other things and I was certainly not expecting such a setup in the car park of a small village pub. 

Trainerman

Hopefully, you may have admitted who was driving, but that is not actual liability. What the signs actually say is important. So, do they say 'no parking' or do they CLEARLY say that  you have to be a customer, or enter reg no using tablet?

The signs form the contract, so what did they say?

Down_On_My_Luck_2023

Trainerman said:

Hopefully, you may have admitted who was driving, but that is not actual liability. What the signs actually say is important. So, do they say 'no parking' or do they CLEARLY say that  you have to be a customer, or enter reg no using tablet?

The signs form the contract, so what did they say?

The signs say:

"Permit Holders Only"

"Customers/visitors must obtain a parking permit by registering on the touch screen inside the premises and entering their full correct vehicle registration"

"General public parking is not permitted."

"If you breach any of these terms you will be liable to a parking charge of up to: £100"

And then further information about data protection.

Mouse007

Down_On_My_Luck_2023 said:

 and there are plenty of signs. Unless there are certain requirements for the signs that they might not have followed (wording, size etc.)

Your defence is about the signs and what is known as Lord Denning’s Red Hand Rule. You need to compare the signs with those that Parking Eye use and understand why they won their Supreme Court case against Beavis.

The claim against you is for breach of contract. That contract was allegedly on a sign, but what does that sign actually say? Did you see it? Could you read it? Did it make you an offer? Were the terms clear?

For a contract to exist there must be an offer and acceptance and consideration must flow both ways. In parking terms that may be you may park here on payment of a fee, or you may park here for so long and leave and in return you agree to pay £100 if you do not leave in time.

Signs which say “Permit holders only” or “No parking” are not making an offer and can not therefore create a contract.

Where PPCs get dirty is with the actual definition of parking and grace periods to consider terms, find a space, pay and leave. They deploy numerous traps to catch as many as possible. They use badly worded and confusing signs with unclear terms and conditions which hide the consequence (£100 charge) of any breaches in the small print. Doing so is against the Red Hand Rule.

There are rules and Court cases about signs, have they broken these rules or judgments?

If you can satisfy the Court that you did not enter into a contract then the case is over. You did not enter into a contract if you did not park, stopping is not parking. You did not enter into a contract if you could not see or read the signs. You did not enter into a contract if there was no offer to park.

DE_612183

You have not parked.

I'm sure someone will come along and quote the relevant court cases etc, but you can't have entered into a contract to park if you didn't.

Mouse007

DE_612183 said:

You have not parked.

I'm sure someone will come along and quote the relevant court cases etc, but you can't have entered into a contract to park if you didn't.

That will be Jopson v Homeguard

Wonka_2

Down_On_My_Luck_2023 said:

 I didn’t ‘park up’ properly but instead just ‘hovered’, with the engine running. My partner was a bit longer than expected due to the pharmacist writing a letter to my child’s doctor and from start to finish we were there 13 minutes, according to the ANPR.

DE_612183 said:

You have not parked.

So from a laymans point of view when does '13 mins hovering' become 'parking'

Trainerman

Down_On_My_Luck_2023 said:

Trainerman said:

Hopefully, you may have admitted who was driving, but that is not actual liability. What the signs actually say is important. So, do they say 'no parking' or do they CLEARLY say that  you have to be a customer, or enter reg no using tablet?

The signs form the contract, so what did they say?

The signs say:

"Permit Holders Only"

"Customers/visitors must obtain a parking permit by registering on the touch screen inside the premises and entering their full correct vehicle registration"

"General public parking is not permitted."

"If you breach any of these terms you will be liable to a parking charge of up to: £100"

And then further information about data protection.

I stand ready to be corrected, but in my view they do not form a contract and are 'forbidding signage' There is no offer and no consideration, therefore no contract. Also, for a contract both sides have to intend to form such, and again I think the signs do not allow that, from what you say.

Jopson v Homeguard may also help re vicissitudes