One Parking Solutions Vantage Point Brighton - Advice, please!

95Rollers

Good Morning @confused_larchie - just seen you Message (and replied). Apologies for the late reply as I've not been on here for a while. But I periodically log in every so often. I myself in 2019 made the misfortunate mistake of attempting to park in Vantage Point. My circumstances were not too dissimilar - I drove in, couldn't find a space, drove out (to find a space elsewhere), my search of another space was fruitless (it is Brighton after all!) and came back to find a space in Vantage Point, parked up - went to pay, machine wouldn't take my cash and then couldn't get a phone signal - so due to not being able to form a contract I left and parked at the station (in a much better cleaner safer carpark).

Anyhow they hounded me with PCNs, debt collectors and court letters. I went to court in 2022 -and successfully defended my case (with the help of this good forum) as have countless others here (they've also dropped cases at the 11th hour).  Please click on my username and this will bring up my thread about the case - and also my replies on other Vantage Point cases. These are easy enough to win. 

I have seen that OPS and their App have made the national press.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/private-parking-firm-accused-tormenting-31168219

nopcns

You have been advised to write to your MP. Your local councillor will not have as much clout as an MP and she sounds just like the millions of ripe, low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree that these PPCs just love.

Coupon-mad

There are loads of places to park in Brighton!

confused_larchie

Thank you, @95Rollers. It's encouraging to read about your case. 'Staying calm' is the key advice here.

And yes, nopcns, I'll write to my local MP, too. 

ParkingMad

This person got a PCN at the same car park as you. OPS issued their first ever court claim. It went to court in 2017 and OPS lost the case. 

https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/14819206.parking-firm-tells-pregnant-woman-she-must-pay-up/#:~:text=Catherine%20Swann%20Hill's%20appeal%20was,appointment%20at%20nearby%20medical%20practice.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3867130/amp/Heavily-pregnant-mother-ordered-pay-100-parking-fine-ticket-blown-gust-wind-large-check.html

The car park is owned by a company called Periworld Ltd. The contract with OPS states
that there is a 15 minute grace period. You might want to try complaining to them.

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/02004643/officers

https://vantagepointoffices.co.uk/

confused_larchie

Thank you all for your support, and to @ParkingMad for the Landowner address.

Below is a draft of my letter to the directors of Periworld Ltd. 

I look forward to your thoughts...

---------------------------

To The Directors,

On 11/11/2023, as indicated in the photo included in the attached PCN letter dated 16/02/2024, my car was driven into the Vantage point car park, 3 Elder Pl, Brighton BN1 4GY) just after 10am. 

The instructions on the POPPAY app were followed, but the app did not work because there was no signal underground in the car park where the machine was. Whatever coins available were put into the machine to get the first ticket, however even outside of the car park, the POPPAY app failed to function. More coins had to be changed at the Aldi nearby (1-4 London Rd, Brighton BN1 4JA) for the second ticket to be dispensed, which is included in the attached photo. 

After such a stressful experience, the car key was momentarily misplaced, causing the late departure from the car park 9 minutes after the expired time of the second ticket. The car park log would show a record of the tickets issued for the car on that day.

Now, over three months later in the last week of February, the attached PCN arrived by post, stating that ''if payment is received within 14 days of this notice, a reduced amount of £60 will be accepted as full and final payment'. The PCN was dated a week before it reached the address above, arriving on 22/02/2024, after the indicated 'Date of Sending: 16/02/2024'. This is a very inconvenient time scale to operate with, and does not allow for adequate time or resource to respond to the PCN properly.

Since the core problem was due to the functionality of the car park’s app, and other means of payment were explored, there’s no reason why this PCN needs to be settled.

I would appreciate your thoughts on this matter and hope you see fit to ensure that OPS cancel their PCN.

I hope you can understand my reasoning for the appeal.

Coupon-mad

Now, over three months later in the last week of February, the attached PCN arrived by post, stating that ''if payment is received within 14 days of this notice, a reduced amount of £60 will be accepted as full and final payment'. The PCN was dated a week before it reached the address above, arriving on 22/02/2024, after the indicated 'Date of Sending: 16/02/2024'. This is a very inconvenient time scale to operate with, and does not allow for adequate time or resource to respond to the PCN properly.

I'd remove this (above) and ask instead, if Periworld are aware that PopPay is OPS' own creation of a notoriously failing app (quelle surprise, from an ex-clamper mentality firm whose own reviews are atrocious).

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck:

https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.poppay.co.uk

...then it's a duck, innit?!

confused_larchie

Hello All,

This morning, PoPLA sent me this lengthy reply:

Unused to these car parks, too much time was wasted trying to figure out their app and they stated that the first (and lost) ticket was not bought until more than 10 minutes after entering...

What do I do now?
I was waiting until their reply comes to post my letter to the Landowner.

Thank you for any suggestions.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Operator Name

One Parking Solution Ltd - EW

Operator Case Summary

Appellant mentions that the PCN arrived three months after the contravention- this is caused by a DVLA delay and does not affect OPS’s ability of issuing the ticket. Appellant also mentions that the POPPAY app did not work as there was no signal- the appellant should have refrained from parking if they are unable to download the app and purchase a parking session. Any information provided in the defence of this parking charge is provided only for the Appellant and Assessor to view. The information is strictly confidential and commercially sensitive. No file, in part or whole submitted by One Parking Solution Ltd may be copied or shared with any other individuals in paper or electronic form. Any such sharing of files or information provided by One Parking Solution Ltd will be reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office. A redacted contract is supplied to protect personal information. The appellant entered into a contractual agreement upon parking on site. The terms are laid out on the signage on site and including at the entrance state that parking is permitted for vehicles displaying a valid PAY AND DISPLAY TICKET and/ or vehicles with a valid parking session in place that has been purchased via the POPPAY App. By parking or remaining on site otherwise than in accordance with the above the driver agrees to pay a parking charge. All motorists are provided with a consideration period to purchase a ticket as per the BPA code of practice. The signs on site state: “All Pay & Display tickets and parking sessions must be purchased within 10 minutes of arrival on site.” An additional minute is included for enforcement purposes, so a grace period of 11 minutes is allowed. The appellant must note that this PCN was issued because they purchased a parking session after the grace period had expired. From the ANPR camera records for this site, the appellant entered the car park at 10:06am and made their first purchase at 10:40am, this is in direct contravention of the terms and conditions listed on the board. As per the signage, it clearly states ‘All pay and display tickets and parking sessions must be purchased within 10 minutes of arrival on site, if all means of payment are unavailable, to not park.’ It also states, ‘by parking or remaining/waiting/idling on this site, other than in accordance with the above, you the driver are agreeing to the following contractual terms: to pay a Parking Charge Notice’. Therefore, the appellant has contravened the terms and conditions of the site, therefore, liable to paying the PCN. The appellant states that they followed the instructions on the POPPAY app which did not work as there was no signal in the underground car park where the machine was. The appellant then went to the Aldi nearby to ask for change as they had no coins, the appellant then went back and got a second ticket. The appellant also alleges that they misplaced their car key, which caused them to leave the car park 9 minutes after the expired time of their ticket. We acknowledge the appellant’s comments. However, the signage clearly mentions that if all means of payment are unavailable, one should not park. If the appellant was unsure of the terms and conditions, they should have refrained from parking and obtained further guidance from One Parking Solution Limited. Moreover, prior to entering the site, at the entrance there is signage which is in place to allow motorists to acknowledge that this is a pay and display site and therefore be prepared to do so. We invite the appellant to review the attached site photos and site map to see where the signage is placed across the site. They appellant also alleges that three months later, the PCN arrived through post stating that ‘if payment is received within 14 days of notice, a reduced amount of £60 will be accepted as full and final payment. Although we understand that this has arrived at a later period, this is not in contravention with the regulations as this issue is caused by a DVLA delay. Moreover, the appellant mentions that the post arrived on the 22nd of February 2024 after the indicated date of sending on the 16th of February 2024. The post was sent on the 16th which is a Friday and arrived at the appellant on the following Thursday. This period still allows the appellant to ensure that they can pay the reduced amount and/or familiarise themselves with the terms and conditions listed before the higher charge. Moreover, the appellant mentions that this has caused them stress and depression, we must stress that we do empathise with the appellant’s comments and understand how difficult the situation would have been. The appellant raises concerns that the PCN was sent three months after the contravention date. The appellant must note that we are not accusing them of theft; however, it must be stressed that there are terms and conditions that this car park is bound by. The appellant should have considered alternative means to avoid this contravention. At the time of the contravention the appellant was not displaying a valid pay and display ticket, and nor did they have pre-authorisation to park their vehicle in the car park as they were not on the exemption list and therefore agreed to pay a parking charge. It is the driver’s responsibility to ensure they are parked in accordance with the terms. If they are unable to do so they should either, make alternative parking arrangements or otherwise agree to pay a parking charge. If the driver is unsure, our number is on the boards and the signs are BPA approved. Not seeking keeper liability as the appellant is clearly the driver.

Coupon-mad

That's not "from POPLA".  That's OPS' case summary to POPLA.

confused_larchie

Thank you, @Coupon-mad, for pointing that out to me.

I wish I had not lost that first parking ticket...