Parking charge notice from Haults Yard Newcastle- via Parking Eye

Coupon-mad

Victim_of_parking_cowboys said:

Oh and not only that they outright lied and told me that "Golf Fang inform customers of a parking charge on the booking confirmation". Again i had to send them my booking confirmation to prove that is also complete !!!!!!

Wow.             

fisherjim

Victim_of_parking_cowboys said:

fisherjim said:

It's not lit at all how on earth could you read anything on that in the dark, you could ask the man standing next to it if he has a torch, no wait......on closer inspection it could be a pay machine.....or maybe not I can't see very much with that bright light at the back blinding me!

Hoults yard kept sending me cut and paste replies about how all parking signs are "adequately lit" I eventually had to say Actually look at the photo i sent you!  How on earth they had the brass neck to say that even after i had sent them that pic is beyond me.

Hopefully if it gets to the court stage that photo will help me win

Maybe remind them that the BPA COP clearly states the following:

CONTRAST AND ILLUMINATION

There must be enough colour contrast between the text and
its background, each of which should be a single solid colour.
The best way to achieve this is to have black text on a white
background, or white text on a black background.
Signs should be readable and understandable at all times,
including during the hours of darkness or at dusk if and when parking
enforcement activity takes place at those times. This can be achieved
in a variety of ways such as by direct lighting or by using the lighting
for the parking area. If the sign itself is not directly or indirectly lit, we
suggest that it should be made of a retro-reflective material similar to
that used on public roads and described in the Traffic Signs Manual. Dark-
coloured areas do not need to be reflective.

Now does that sign conform to the above? I think not!

Victim_of_parking_cowboys

fisherjim said:

Victim_of_parking_cowboys said:

fisherjim said:

It's not lit at all how on earth could you read anything on that in the dark, you could ask the man standing next to it if he has a torch, no wait......on closer inspection it could be a pay machine.....or maybe not I can't see very much with that bright light at the back blinding me!

Hoults yard kept sending me cut and paste replies about how all parking signs are "adequately lit" I eventually had to say Actually look at the photo i sent you!  How on earth they had the brass neck to say that even after i had sent them that pic is beyond me.

Hopefully if it gets to the court stage that photo will help me win

Maybe remind them that the BPA COP clearly states the following:

CONTRAST AND ILLUMINATION

There must be enough colour contrast between the text and
its background, each of which should be a single solid colour.
The best way to achieve this is to have black text on a white
background, or white text on a black background.
Signs should be readable and understandable at all times,
including during the hours of darkness or at dusk if and when parking
enforcement activity takes place at those times. This can be achieved
in a variety of ways such as by direct lighting or by using the lighting
for the parking area. If the sign itself is not directly or indirectly lit, we
suggest that it should be made of a retro-reflective material similar to
that used on public roads and described in the Traffic Signs Manual. Dark-
coloured areas do not need to be reflective.

Now does that sign conform to the above? I think not!

Thankyou for the information. My only concern with that BPA information is is the bit below

"If the sign itself is not directly or indirectly lit, we
suggest that it should be made of a retro-reflective material similar to
that used on public roads and described in the Traffic Signs Manual"

So does that mean they can have a completely unlit sign if it is 'retro-reflective'? I mean I do not know enough about sign material to know if it was retro-reflective or they could possibly use that defence.

My complaining to the landowner route proved fruitless as they kept gaslighting me saying the car park was 'well lit' even in that pic I sent them!

This was their response

"There are signs all throughout the car park, multiple sources of light, and a digital display that prompts several times to pay for parking. To reach the entrance to Golf Fang, you pass two Pay and Display machines.

We also note, that in the photograph you have posted, there are five signs shown, one placed directly under a large outdoor spotlight. Additionally, there is a pay and display machine in the photo next to the sign.

It is the responsibility of visitors to any car park to check if they need to pay to park"

The amount of lies in this statement is enormous
1) there is only one pay and display machine
2) they reckon those tiny blue signs in the background on the buildings i should have noticed (you walk past neither on the way to Golf Fang which is to the left)

Also from this pic do I have a genuine chance of winning this in court on the badly lit sign basis or am I just wasting my time? I am getting a bit disillusioned and think i'm just going to get screwed over regardless as I have zero faith in the justice system.



Thanks all.

Victim_of_parking_cowboys

Also when I complained to the BPA that parking eye had not sent me the appeal rejection letter/email so I could not appeal to POPLA i got this response

"Appealing the Parking Charge

Please be advised that when a Parking Charge Notice is issued by a member of our Approved Operator Scheme, a motorist will have 28 days to appeal this via the operator's internal appeals procedure if they believe that it was issued either unfairly or incorrectly; the process should be outlined in the Parking Charge Notice. The operator has 35 days to respond. 

If the appeal is rejected the operator should provide details on how to further appeal to the free and independent appeals service, POPLA. A further appeal is available via POPLA for 28 days following the operator rejecting the appeal.

As the operator has advised an email was sent 22nd January 2024 and provided a copy of the appeal response, we are unable to become further involved as we are unable to ascertain what was sent/received by either party.

We cannot compel an operator to revert a charge"

The bit in bold I find alarming as they can just say they sent it and that is fine apparently even if i did not receive it. I am also now worried they will not send any further letters/emails about the court date etc so I lose automatically.

I got the letter before county court claim on 13 March 2024 and have received nothing since. Is this normal?

Coupon-mad

Yes that's normal but please confirm that you replied to the LBCCC by email, as the NEWBIES thread suggests for ParkingEye cases, given the litigation team is not the same as the appeals team.

Yes these cases are usually won in court by posters on this forum.

Victim_of_parking_cowboys

Coupon-mad said:

Yes that's normal but please confirm that you replied to the LBCCC by email, as the NEWBIES thread suggests for ParkingEye cases, given the litigation team is not the same as the appeals team.

Yes these cases are usually won in court by posters on this forum.

Yes I emailed that address to tell them I never got the appeal rejection or POPLA ref number. They fobbed me off basically and said they emailed me on 22 January. I had no email on that date from them

Coupon-mad

Email again and ask for a fresh POPLA code in the interests of resolving the dispute.

Victim_of_parking_cowboys

Coupon-mad said:

Email again and ask for a fresh POPLA code in the interests of resolving the dispute.

Ok have done cheers

Nellymoser

As you're having communication problems with a PPC you may wish to support this.

So many people don't receive 1st and/or 2nd pcn but the £170 payment due letter often manages to drop through letter boxes. PPCs always claim discounted/full rate pcns/court claim letters were sent though they offer no evidence to prove this.

Since they CHOOSE NOT to provide evidence of posting we must continue to press gov to ensure they do and include it in the new Parking CoP. Please sign/share @jmccabe petition closes 22nd june 2024.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/652355
Require communications from Private Parking companies to be traceable/trackable
Thanks. Good luck.

Victim_of_parking_cowboys

Nellymoser said:

As you're having communication problems with a PPC you may wish to support this.

So many people don't receive 1st and/or 2nd pcn but the £170 payment due letter often manages to drop through letter boxes. PPCs always claim discounted/full rate pcns/court claim letters were sent though they offer no evidence to prove this.

Since they CHOOSE NOT to provide evidence of posting we must continue to press gov to ensure they do and include it in the new Parking CoP. Please sign/share @jmccabe petition closes 22nd june 2024.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/652355
Require communications from Private Parking companies to be traceable/trackable
Thanks. Good luck.

Signed, they 100% did not send me my appeal rejection with POLA code via email like they claim. I know this as they have emailed me again today from the same email address they claim they sent the appeal rejection and I have received it fine, direct to my main inbox so it cannot possibly have went to my junk folder.

They have refused to give me a fresh POPLA code and when I complained to the BPA they just said they have no way of knowing what was sent or received by either party so cant do anything. Absolutely insane! What is there to stop Parking Eye from never sending any POPLA codes then? or at least picking and chosing what ones not to send if they think they might lose the appeal.

Anyway to give an update Parking Eye emailed me today and said that unless I pay £125 as described in the LBCCC in the next 14 days they will be taking me to court and I will potentially liable for court fees etc.

Guess I am just waiting for that now then.