Partial appeal

Coupon-mad

Which can't be used for appeals.  It's not given on the PCN as an option.

Peter767

Thanks guys

Can you please check if this challenge is ok to send in post?

We are challenging your parking charge notice xxxxxxxx dated xxxx on the following grounds.

Driver liability

You are presuming the registered keeper is the driver of the vehicle. We have no recollection of who the driver on that day was and not obliged to provide you this information unless instructed by an appropriate authority to do so.

Inadequate signage

We personally believe that this ticket was issued unfairly. The driver should not be liable for the amount payable because there is insufficient signage in your car park. Firstly, there is no signage at the entrance of this car park. We have enclosed a photo of the entrance taken yesterday. The BPA guidelines require clear signage erected at each entrance and additional signage installed throughout the area by all BPA members. Without these, there is no possibility the driver could have entered any contract or breached the terms and conditions as the letter alleges. The NTK back page gives a false declaration about appropriate signage, which is misleading. The BPA and APS logos are not clearly displayed on the signage despite it being a specific requirement for compliant signage. You are using ANPR camera systems, but this is not clearly advertised on the signage.

Misleading signs at entrance

Having since re-visited the site and researched the rules we now understand why the driver might have been misled into parking at your car park. There is only one faded entrance mark to this overflow car park, which is not clearly visible, acts like a trap due to one way signage and no other instructions at the entrance. Inside the car park, there is only one but poorly lit paying machine which is in a corner and can be easily missed. There are not sufficient additional signs placed around the area stating the restrictions that are in force. The letters on the available signs do not meet the minimum height of 50mm necessary for adequate driver information. The parking signs around the site are smaller than the minimum necessary size of 450mm x 450mm. We believe there has been a recent change in ownership from barrier to pay and display parking for this car park which adds to confusion. The other side of the car park is council owned barrier entry and has clear instructions at the barrier entrance for parkers to make their informed consent. Can you please confirm who owns this car park and what changes were made when the ownership was changed. Can you also provide a copy of the transfer of ownership?

Unfair demand for payment

The large sum demanded amounts to a penalty and/or is not an accurate reflection of any loss suffered so it is not a reasonable charge. Your monetary claim is disproportionate, punitive, and unjustifiable in total. It may also be an unfair term and therefore in breach of Schedule 2 of the Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Please provide a breakdown of how your demanded charge is calculated so that the driver can consider further whether it amounts to a penalty. As an owner, I can request the driver to pay any parking fee arising.

The contractual breach could have caused no financial loss whatever to you or to the landowner but if you believe it has, please set out the details clearly in your response.  If you believe the driver has committed a trespass, please substantiate your consequential actual loss. If there were, for example, unoccupied places available for others to park so the driver’s presence might not have prevented the parking of other cars and their making of payments.

If you believe so, kindly supply photos clearly showing the car park was fully occupied if you believe you suffered any losses.

Invoice details incorrect

 Your Civil Parking Notice constitutes an invoice for payment. Accordingly, your invoiced charge must include an element of VAT. However, your civil parking notice does not state either a VAT registration number or an invoice reference number and so cannot constitute a lawfully valid demand for payment.

PCN non compliant

Having examined your parking charge notice I believe it is a non-compliant demand for payment because your notice refers in the text to being a PCN/ penalty charge notice, this term being attributed to a penalty charge notice issued by a local authority. It is therefore easily confused with a statutory penalty charge notice. The BPA is clear in its rules that such abbreviations and terms are not permissible.

Your notice refers to a “contravention” which is misleading for implying it to have been issued by a statutory authority.  The term “contravention” which is usable only in penalty charge notices issued by local authorities is neither correct nor appropriate terminology for a civil parking notice.

Your notice wrongly requires payment to be made “within” 28 days which is contrary to statutory requirement that provides a period of 28 days from the date of receipt.

Genuine customer exemption

Can you please confirm if there is a contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights, and of course all enforcement dates/times/days, and the boundary of the site - is key evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do, and when/where.

It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is authorised on the material date, to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and you as an operator are meant to provide a strict proof of full compliance.

ANPR used is unreliable 

While you have presented 2 photos of the entry and exit, these are not in themselves a sufficient proof of any alleged contravention or driver liability. Moreover, you have failed to show any evidence whatsoever of a reliable ANPR system. it has been judged in courts previously that the system is unreliable in its event logging on any objective basis. The car park only has one entrance and one exit and the ANPR at the entrance is front facing therefore there is only one picture of entry which is not enough. Also, there is no date to match the alleged date of contravention on these pictures, merely a self generated time and date added at the bottom of the pictures. Can you therefore submit evidence to show

1)     ANPR photos with the date and time 

2)     Additional evidence or photos of the car actually parked at the site

3)     Signs clearly highlighting ANPR in operation at entrance and throughout the car park

 

Grace period during stay

The BPA guidelines require you to allow a grace period either to allow a motorist to read the signs and make payment or decide whether parking is permitted, and at the end of a period of paid for time or maximum stay to allow for discrepancies in the time shown on different devices. A reasonable grace period would be 30 minutes but it may be that the owners of this site have instructed you to offer a different grace period. Please advise the actual grace period in operation so that I can assess whether you have acted reasonably.

If this challenge / appeal is rejected, to enable me to prepare a formal appeal to P.O.P.L.A please provide the following documentation:

A copy of your contract with the landowner which authorises you to act on their behalf in the management of this car parking area.

A copy of the contract which you allege I entered in to when I parked.

Photographic evidence of the actual signs in situ, together with identification of the locations around the site where these signs are currently placed. Please also confirm the date when the photographs were taken (if not evident from the photographs themselves) and whether you have made any alterations to the signage since the photograph was taken.

A copy of the full terms and conditions for use of the land where I was allegedly parked wrongly.

A copy of your certificate of membership of the BPA

A copy of your protocol which your enforcement and CCTV operators are required to follow.

A copy of your standard appeal procedure and confirm whether it complies with the Arbitration Act 1996.

Full details of the owner of the parking area (if it is not already stated in the copy contract above) as I wish to send them a copy of my letter to you.

A copy of all the images that you have of my vehicle. I understand that the Data Protection Act entitles me to all this information.

A copy of your protocol for handling personal data such as images of my vehicle. I assume that such data is not disclosed to any third party (other than POPLA in the event of an appeal) but please confirm this.

Please provide this information within 28 days of receipt.  If you are unable to provide any of the requested documents, please provide a reason for each omission.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully,

xxx

Le_Kirk

Why not just use the standard appeal in blue text from the NEWBIE sticky?

Peter767

Thanks Le_Kirk
We have dealt with ECP in the past and the standard templates are mostly rejected as they have come to know most use the same.

Umkomaas

Peter767 said:

Thanks Le_Kirk
We have dealt with ECP in the past and the standard templates are mostly rejected as they have come to know most use the same.

Do you believe that your non-standard appeal will fare any better?

Peter767

Lol don't think so
just wanted to give a string rebuttal, that's it!

Umkomaas

Peter767 said:

Lol don't think so
just wanted to give a string rebuttal, that's it!

They won't even read it. Expect a rejection by return. Get your POPLA code and hope to win there, but if you are intending to also go off-piste from forum templates in writing that appeal, you'll need to sift the chaff from the wheat when you construct it!

B789

One bit of chaff... your "Unfair demand for payment" chapter is way out of date and not a factor since Beavis. 

KeithP

You can't say this...

You are presuming the registered keeper is the driver of the vehicle. We have no recollection of who the driver on that day was and not obliged to provide you this information unless instructed by an appropriate authority to do so.

If you 'have no recollection of who was the driver on that day', how will being 'instructed by an appropriate authority' allow you to tell them who was driving?

Le_Kirk

Peter767 said:

Thanks Le_Kirk
We have dealt with ECP in the past and the standard templates are mostly rejected as they have come to know most use the same.

It will be rejected anyway; there is no money to be made by accepting appeals!