PCN received for parking in parent/child bay with children!

Half_way

B789 said:

It's this place: https://goo.gl/maps/H4RUy667vVrzciL1A

As you can see, the iconography on the parking places bears no resemblance to the iconography on the sign.

Aside from the idiotic proof the PPC has to provide to back up their lying enforcers, this has no chance of ever going to court... unless the PPC is managed by supreme morons who just love getting spanked in court.

Their website https://belle-vale.co.uk/find-us/ says this:

These car parks are on private property and we have appointed Care parking, Anchor Group Service, to manage this free facility.

We ask all users of the car parks to adhere to the Terms & condition of use, that is clearly listed on the signage around the car parks. A Penalty Charge Notice will be issued for any misuse of the car parks.

So is this ocean parking, or Care parking ? - the GSV indicates ocean

Fruitcake

Doing a quick virtual tour of the car park shows that there are no gimmick bays bearing the icons shown on the signs that form the alleged parking contract.
There are however a load of bays marked with two stick people, but the surface markings of those bays do not appear on the signs that form the alleged parking contract.

It appears therefore that there are in fact no gimmick bays at the site, but even if there were, there would be no consequences (no breach of parking contract) even if they did exists and someone were to park in one.

fluffy123

Sorry, just to clarify, there are actually two car parks as part of this shopping centre. The ground level one which has been linked in previous comments and a 'above level' car park as well.

See: https://www.google.com/local/place/fid/0x487b1fa2e68718f1:0xe32a37420d8cc7a8/photosphere?iu=https://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?panoid%3DeNCR9pm6auIjxa39yScrYw%26cb_client%3Dlu.gallery.gps%26w%3D160%26h%3D106%26yaw%3D354.29745%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100&ik=CAISFmVOQ1I5cG02YXVJanhhMzl5U2NyWXc%3D

The A/C spaces (along with disabled spaces) are on the left-hand side of this view. Essentially in front of the container in front of the JD Gym frontage, if that makes sense.

Pic of typical space on this 'upper level' car park here and the signage in my previous message relates to this section of car park.
https://imgbb.com/q9TCvYx

I did consider the GDPR route considering this involves children in the 'evidence'.

B789

As you can see, the "Parent & Child" spaces on the upper car park are also different from the iconography on the signs.

As already pointed out, there is no age stipulation as to the age of the child or for the parent for that matter. As everyone is a child of someone, as long as someone else is also a parent of someone, they are allowed to use those bays.

Coupon-mad

Appeal saying yes, the car WAS parked in a P&C bay.  Because there were two children with the driver! It seems that the operator has a rogue ticketer who has issued PCNs to every car in the P&C bays, as if it's some sort of crime to use them with children.  Not only is not not a crime but it's also not a breach of the terms on the sign, which is a nonsense and sets no contractual terms relating to those bays.  It just says these bays 'are available'.  Jolly good, as long as the rogue ticketer is sacked.

The_Slithy_Tove

B789 said:

 As everyone is a child of someone, as long as someone else is also a parent of someone, they are allowed to use those bays.

And if my childless sister takes my child(ren) to this place and parks in one of those bays, then what? Aside from the nonsense signage, surely insisting that the "grown-up" accompanying a child is a parent must breach some kind of equality legislation :-)

Half_way

If you are going down that road, then the correct phrase instead of parent and child would be young person with carer.

As for the parking incident, a very strong complaint to the shopping centre, reminding then that they are liable for the actions of their agents (as they may try and fob you off with a nothing to do with us response) and that you are using this add a breach of data protection/GDPR as they, through the actions of their agents have no just cause for accessing and processing your personal data

fluffy123

UPDATE: Going down the complaint route with the shopping centre hasn't got me anywhere. After two emails and two phone calls, I finally got to speak to somebody who basically stated it was out of their hands but...apparently...there had been other people who had encountered issues with a parking attendant, who to quote the person on the phone...'is a bit of a liar'. 

So it looks like appeals route. I've noticed Ocean Parking have an appeals portal but before proceeding, it requires me to enter in the details of the driver at the time. As the process is to avoid this, I'm assuming a straight email to their appeals email is best?

Would the following be sufficient?

To whom it may concern,

Re: PCN XXXXXXX

I have recently received a 'notice to keeper' letter from Ocean Parking relating to a Parking Charge of £100.

This 'charge' relates to a vehicle being parked in a parent/child bay on 3rd January when the driver parked around the time stated to visit the shopping centre with two children under the age of five, returning shortly after.

I wish to complain about receiving this as the driver was parked in this bay legitimately with two young children visiting the shopping centre in question. 

The facts are as follows:

• The driver arrived at the shopping centre shortly before the date/time noted on the letter that has been received.
• The driver parked in a parent/child bay as they were legitimately entitled to do so.
• The driver exited the vehicle with two young children under the age of 5 to enter the shopping centre.
• One car seat was removed from the rear passenger seats of the vehicle to attach to a pram frame.
• The second car seat remained in the rear driver's side passenger seat and would have easily been seen through the rear driver's side passenger window.
• The driver returned to the vehicle shortly after the time noted on the 'charge'. Again, with both children under the age of five to depart from the car park.

I look forward to you providing comprehensive video and photographic evidence to suggest that all of the above is incorrect. As I am fully confident that this will be unable to be provided, I can see no reason why this 'charge' should apply

Despite the letter's claim, there was no notification left on the car to suggest any infringement had taken place (which would have been an error anyway). Therefore I urge you to also investigate this further as this has constituted an 'increase' in the 'parking charge' as a result. I also believe that this could constitute a breach of GDPR as data has been obtained through the DVLA to contact myself with insufficient evidence obtained to show that a breach has been committed.

I look forward to hearing from you with a swift conclusion to this matter otherwise I will have little option but to escalate further.

Thanks,

Fruitcake

If there is no option to select "Keeper" or "Other" then the keeper will have to appeal by email or by post. If there no possibility for anyone other than the driver to appeal on the appeal portal then a complaint to the BPA should be made about this sharp practice.

If appealing by email then put the word Appeal and the PCN number in the title. Send a copy to your own email address as well. If you receive it then on the balance of probabilities so did the PPC.

Change "whom it may concern" to "Appeals department." 

End it with the keeper's name followed by Registered Keeper.

Personally I think the appeal is fine. This is a data breach of the DPA 2015 and GDPR 2018, so include both.

Complain to the DVLA as well. Has your MP been involved yet? Things will never changed unless people complain to them. 

Did you complain to the BPA? You should, and ask why the parking company's attendant isn't paying attention to a person or persons unknown who is removing NTDs after she or he has affixed them.

Half_way

When you complained to the shopping centre did you tell them they are liable for the actions of their agents, the parking company and  that you are treating this as a breach of data protection/ GDPR?

If not then do so