is the public allowed to provide private parking firms with vehicle reg and time etc?

pop23

So I had a hand written note on windscreen, then a week later a PCN in the post to the reg keeper. there are no cameras just a grumpy resident. 

I plan to appeal online and will use this as my reasoning -

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your Parking Charge Notice is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

In order for any signage to exist at the stated location, an application for 'advertising consent' needs to be made with Wychavon Council. As of this date no application can be found, they have been informed. 

As a member of the International Parking Community (IPC) and therefore an Accredited Trade Association (ATA) member, your codes of practice state that their logos are required on all signage you might use, otherwise a breach has occurred.
_______

Is that enough?

I'm so grateful for all the help so far

pop23

Umkomaas said:

pop23 said:

Have checked with Wychavon Council no application for advertising consent has been found. 

You could ask them to investigate and enforce as failure to obtain advertising consent (quite different to planning permission) is a criminal offence. Unless you're prepared to be on the back of the council chasing them to enforce, don't hold your breath on anything happening. By the way, they cannot issue retrospective consent, but many do to avoid getting into conflict. 

thanks for this, I have asked them to investigate and enforce.

Fruitcake

pop23 said:

Have checked with Wychavon Council no application for advertising consent has been found. 

Then complain to the PPC, the IPC, the council planning department, and your MP. At a time when local and central government are strapped for cash, remind the latter two how much money they could be putting in to the public coffers if penalties were issued for every breach.
Also point out that the law of "ex turpi Causa non oritur actio", often referred to as the "illegality defence" applies where a person may not profit from an illegal act. Obtaining and processing keeper details from the DVLA and then demanding money, including issuing court claims, would be a direct result from the illegal act of not having advertising consent.

Having advertising consent is also a requirement of para 12 of Schedule 4 of the PoFA.

I doubt it will get you anywhere, but it will annoy the PPC and cost them money if the council forces them to apply. Planning permission for pole mounted ANPR scameras and control boxes can be granted retrospectively. Advertising consent cannot. Councils should demand that all monies illegally obtained are repaid to motorists before consent is granted.

While you are at it, you may as well ask your MP why the DVLA are selling keeper data to PPCs that have no legal right to do so, and are therefore complicit in committing a criminal act by selling said data without first checking that the PPC has advertising consent before they illegally release the data.

pop23

Wychavon have responded re my telling them that no advertising content had been applied for and said they will investigate but that other things may will take priority.

I'm worried now that they are right that advertising consent is not required on private land, apparently it is only needed on private property if the advertisement or sign is larger than 0.3 sq metres. looking at the images, their signs seem to be A4.

My questions now are is it more cost effective for them not to pursue a CCJ for non payment of an invoice for £60 or £100. 

Does a contract have to actively be agreed upon for it to be binding? 

Interestingly their photographic evidence doesn't actually show a car and a sign in the same shot. 

It bugs me that they claim to be applying the 'law' when they are merely invoicing the driver. 

any advice most welcome. 

Coupon-mad

Ignore them.  Come back if they try a claim.

pop23

pop23 said:

Wychavon have responded re my telling them that no advertising content had been applied for and said they will investigate but that other things may will take priority.

I'm worried now that they are right that advertising consent is not required on private land, apparently it is only needed on private property if the advertisement or sign is larger than 0.3 sq metres. looking at the images, their signs seem to be A4.

My questions now are is it more cost effective for them not to pursue a CCJ for non payment of an invoice for £60 or £100. 

Does a contract have to actively be agreed upon for it to be binding? 

Interestingly their photographic evidence doesn't actually show a car and a sign in the same shot. 

It bugs me that they claim to be applying the 'law' when they are merely invoicing the driver. 

any advice most welcome. 

just realised the signs are A3 which is larger than .3 square metres so they do need consent.

A3 is .1247 square metres. 

KeithP

pop23 said:

pop23 said:

Wychavon have responded re my telling them that no advertising content had been applied for and said they will investigate but that other things may will take priority.

I'm worried now that they are right that advertising consent is not required on private land, apparently it is only needed on private property if the advertisement or sign is larger than 0.3 sq metres. looking at the images, their signs seem to be A4.

My questions now are is it more cost effective for them not to pursue a CCJ for non payment of an invoice for £60 or £100. 

Does a contract have to actively be agreed upon for it to be binding? 

Interestingly their photographic evidence doesn't actually show a car and a sign in the same shot. 

It bugs me that they claim to be applying the 'law' when they are merely invoicing the driver. 

any advice most welcome. 

just realised the signs are A3 which is larger than .3 square metres so they do need consent.

A3 is .1247 square metres. 

A3 paper size is 297 mm x 420 mm.
Area is  0.125m² which is significantly smaller than 0.3m².

pop23

KeithP said:

pop23 said:

pop23 said:

Wychavon have responded re my telling them that no advertising content had been applied for and said they will investigate but that other things may will take priority.

I'm worried now that they are right that advertising consent is not required on private land, apparently it is only needed on private property if the advertisement or sign is larger than 0.3 sq metres. looking at the images, their signs seem to be A4.

My questions now are is it more cost effective for them not to pursue a CCJ for non payment of an invoice for £60 or £100. 

Does a contract have to actively be agreed upon for it to be binding? 

Interestingly their photographic evidence doesn't actually show a car and a sign in the same shot. 

It bugs me that they claim to be applying the 'law' when they are merely invoicing the driver. 

any advice most welcome. 

just realised the signs are A3 which is larger than .3 square metres so they do need consent.

A3 is .1247 square metres. 

A3 paper size is 297 mm x 420 mm.
Area is  0.125m² which is significantly smaller than 0.3m².

There's a reason i don't work with numbers. thank you.

this means their signs are allowed to be there without advertising consent. 

KeithP

pop23 said:

KeithP said:

pop23 said:

pop23 said:

Wychavon have responded re my telling them that no advertising content had been applied for and said they will investigate but that other things may will take priority.

I'm worried now that they are right that advertising consent is not required on private land, apparently it is only needed on private property if the advertisement or sign is larger than 0.3 sq metres. looking at the images, their signs seem to be A4.

My questions now are is it more cost effective for them not to pursue a CCJ for non payment of an invoice for £60 or £100. 

Does a contract have to actively be agreed upon for it to be binding? 

Interestingly their photographic evidence doesn't actually show a car and a sign in the same shot. 

It bugs me that they claim to be applying the 'law' when they are merely invoicing the driver. 

any advice most welcome. 

just realised the signs are A3 which is larger than .3 square metres so they do need consent.

A3 is .1247 square metres. 

A3 paper size is 297 mm x 420 mm.
Area is  0.125m² which is significantly smaller than 0.3m².

There's a reason i don't work with numbers. thank you.

this means their signs are allowed to be there without advertising consent. 

It also means that the writing on their very small signs was impossible to read. 

Coupon-mad

But the signs are FAR smaller than the new statutory Code of Practice says operators should provide in future.  It's not retrospective but supports the stance that current private parking signage is almost universally inadequate in size.

And that's before you even look at font size and the test of prominence (of the notices themselves, and the terms)!