PCM, high point village

Peter767

Dear forum members

My wife has received this PCN as a RK, she was not the driver. The place is high point village, outside Hayes and Harlington train station. She just went to pick up a relative and the car was not parked but always on with children in the car The photos on the PCN are not clear at all but on the website there are photos of her car from 12:27 to 12:32 without any clear evidence of being in a restricted area and the boot open in almost all the photos excpet the first (1227) and the last photos which just shows the car at a distance driving on a road.

This is the location
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5037206,-0.4198378,3a,75y,346.76h,78.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJdmMrFSf7FsKSdwWBsiuPg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu

and the front of the PCN
https://ibb.co/yS9K8fJ

Can she transfer the liability to the driver at this stage (driver is abroad) or appeal and are there any grounds of appeal.

She thinks there were practically no or little signs, she stayed for less than 5 minutes thinking pick up is allowed, never parked or left the car unattended.

Could she appel to the landowner in the first instance?

Many thanks

B789

Welcome. The NtK, whilst mentioning PoFA, is not strictly complaint as the wording does not conform to what is required by the Act, which means that the RK cannot be liable for the PCN even though they try to claim it can. Also, is the location covered by railway byelaws? If it is, then again, the RK cannot be held liable.

They have no idea who the driver is. If the driver lives abroad, then you could give them the details but they will probably then try and come after the RK under their claim to have issued the NtK according to the PoFA Act (disputable as stated above).

Of course, a complaint to the landowner is Plan A as stated in the Newbies/FAQ thread. You could also ask your MP to intervene. For now, I would not advise giving them the identity of the driver.

Coupon-mad

Is this the infamous Mrs Sunglasses site?

Similar PCM crap:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/12/heath-parade-graham-park-way-scam-site.html?m=1

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/01/pcm-uk-lose-case-on-heath-parade-scam.html?m=1

Different but well known scam site. Same MO.

Here's a report about PCM's attempt to use Gladstones to sue over a Hayes & Harlington case:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/12/gladstones-epic-fail-hayes-and.html?m=1

This 'outrageous scam' MO has been going on for years.  PCM were outed on Watchdog as rogue traders with no appeal:
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/05/is-it-pcm-uk-who-make-up-stuff-all-time.html?m=1

The keeper should give the name & address of the driver if the driver is the more robust person.  Don't let the upcoming (laughable!) £170 threatograms go to a person in the family who might feel pressured into paying.

Peter767

Thanks B-789 and coupon mad

The cases quoted above are very old, the latest signage is in google maps, our final defence would be (don't think appeal or POPLA/Adjudicators or BPA would do anything
1) 3 minutes is not a reasonable time to issue a PCN, its unfair and aggressive approach
2) signage is invalid- can we request copies without an appeal and ask them to put case on hold?
3) PCN is not POFA compliant, can we challenge them on this?
4) there are railway byelaws and the driver believes they were on the railway or public land not private land, can we request them to provide conformation of this?
 5) the first few photos just show a car in the first 1 minute with no clear registration, first photo to capture reg number is at 1228, when the boot is open, last photo at 1231 shows car on the road not at land- can we request them to send all photos they have under Freedom information including any photos of the driver so we know everything before a court date, also none of the photos conform the car at private land, just standing with boot open, how can we challenge this?
6) there were compassionate grounds as the child was sick and the driver got down to get towel from boot not knowing they were in an alleged private land for just 90 seconds and then moved, can we mention this now or in the formal appeals?
7) the RK was not the driver, as mentioned earlier we need to decide when to transfer liability, we think it might be 

Can we also ask if anyone knows
1) the land owner contact details
2) the railways authority to complain
3) the local MP

Many thanks

AmikoFrizz982

Another motorist will be harassed up to Court for no reason by Parking Control Management Ltd and Gladstones, in liaison with the managers of this land and of course with IAC/IAS most probably doing nothing - we all know why.

I agree with the content stated in the previous posts, a robust complaint to the freeholder and the land management is needed. Also, I'd check if the landlord authority is in order, on this contract with PCM. In these car parks near stations, it's not easy for them to sort things right. Entrance signs are present? Signage is sufficient? Did they comply with Pofa 2012 and most of all IAC CoP?

Complain to your MP and the landowner/manager reporting word by word the naughty way PCM UK Ltd works. These MPs should be asked to write to IAC too, even just to waste some "precious" time of the notorious Will Hurley. We should involve MPs the most we can, considering the current work by the Government and the Committee to end unfair practices by PPCs.

Regarding the appeal procedure, if there's still time for that, I would make an appeal to PCM UK Ltd. Here you'll mention the mitigating circumstances (child sick, etc.), that's something for the parking operator (in theory, in real life as we all know normally all is dismissed/ignored) and the landowner/managing agent. Then, I suggest instructing a full IAS appeal procedure, knowing that it is a farce. Just to highlight later in a defence how the whole chain is compromised. I suggest proceeding with it also to just waste the time of the pretty dodgy characters who run these companies (again, ask the MPs to complain to PCM UK Ltd and IAC).

About the IAS appeal, I believe IAS doesn't consider mitigating circumstances. The "independent" appeal service IAS intervenes for breaches of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the Parking Code of Practice signed up by the operator, so the document sent to them has to be well made with a strong case.

PCM is well known to normally dismiss even inquiries from MPs, not answering the questions and eluding any topic not convenient for them. They normally send a polite rejection letter with an indication to follow up with IPC. MPs usually proceed with it in good faith, only to receive another bounce letter full of the usual nonsense sometimes directly from the address of notorious Will Hurley. Then, these guys, if is convenient for them, silently put the case aside in a different way at a later stage, without admitting anything.

We all know that The Independent Appeals Service (IAS) is administered by The International Parking Community, IPC. IPC is operated by Will Hurley, in the past Director of Gladstones Solicitors. Gladstones Solicitors, directed by John Davies, operates in debt recovery, often working with private car park operators to collect unpaid parking fines, offering specialised litigation service. John Davies was previously Director of IPC and currently sits in the The IPC Steering Committee. Everyone reading can reflect and come to own conclusion about the professionalism and reliability of this whole procedure. I don't see anything "professional" in all this chain.

All in all, it seems to me this is a weak case for them, their speculative payment request is so superficial. If you build up a big thing complaining about this to everyone they might give up and leave you alone at some point in the process.

Coupon-mad

Peter767 said:

Thanks B-789 and coupon mad

The cases quoted above are very old, the latest signage is in google maps, our final defence would be (don't think appeal or POPLA/Adjudicators or BPA would do anything
1) 3 minutes is not a reasonable time to issue a PCN, its unfair and aggressive approach
2) signage is invalid- can we request copies without an appeal and ask them to put case on hold?
3) PCN is not POFA compliant, can we challenge them on this?
4) there are railway byelaws and the driver believes they were on the railway or public land not private land, can we request them to provide conformation of this?
 5) the first few photos just show a car in the first 1 minute with no clear registration, first photo to capture reg number is at 1228, when the boot is open, last photo at 1231 shows car on the road not at land- can we request them to send all photos they have under Freedom information including any photos of the driver so we know everything before a court date, also none of the photos conform the car at private land, just standing with boot open, how can we challenge this?
6) there were compassionate grounds as the child was sick and the driver got down to get towel from boot not knowing they were in an alleged private land for just 90 seconds and then moved, can we mention this now or in the formal appeals?
7) the RK was not the driver, as mentioned earlier we need to decide when to transfer liability, we think it might be 

Can we also ask if anyone knows
1) the land owner contact details
2) the railways authority to complain
3) the local MP

Many thanks

PCM have nothing to do with the BPA or POPLA.

When we say complain to your MP we mean your home constituency MP; you can only complain to ask yours to assist.

B789

@Peter767, all your questions are related to something much further down the road. Right now you are at Plan A stage. You complain to the landowner and you ask your MP to intervene.

Plan B is your appeal to PCM. Do not identify the driver. Any "photos" they have of anyone are meaningless. They have no idea who anyone in any photo is. They do not have some magical database with everyone in the UK's photos and names. You can try mitigation in Plan B but you are dealing with ex-clamper knobs who are only interested in scamming you for as much as they can get.

Plan C, if/when your Plan B appeal is rejected is a total non-starter and not worth the effort.

Plan D is when you will get this finally put to bed. Before then, you can study the Newbies/FAQ thread, the second post in particular, which you will need to refer to if/when you receive an LoC or claim form. It just means that you have to weather the inevitable storm of useless debt collector letters which are designed to get low hanging fruit to be picked off the gullible tree.

You have no debt unless a judge says you do and even then, you would pay less than what they will claim. Or, more likely, they get spanked in court for their scam.

Peter767

Thanks B789
That reply has made us feel a bit relaxed going into the weekend. We are at Plan a stage and today i've written to our local MP but don't know who the land owner is? any help from forum members would be greatly appreciated.
also, is there any point in writing to London underground at this stage as railway byelaws might apply?

KeithP

Confirmation that Hayes and Harlington is subject to TfL Byelaws as from December 2017:-
www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tube_station_car_parks_2

B789

So, there is no Keeper liability as it is not "relevant land". Any Plan B appeal tells PCM that as the RK cannot be held liable, they should go pursue the driver... good luck.

Aside from that, there are no signs on entry to the road that this is private land and that any terms or conditions exist. Another loophole should they ever be so stupid as to try and progress this to court.

Peter767

dear forum members
does anyone know who the landowner of this private land is?