Please check that I'm doing the right thing here. ParkingEye PCN

LDast

I've read the Newbies thread and hope I'm following the correct procedure but would like confirmation if possible.

I parked at the Royal Bolton Hospital, not as a patient but I had some business to do with someone in one of the departments. When I finished, I went to pay for the parking (pay on exit), both payment machines were not working. One was being repaired by a technician and a whole bunch of people were wondering what to do. I took a photo of the payment machines and the people waiting to trying to pay. I tried the phone number on the signs but it just advised me to go some obscure website, nothing to do with Parking Eye.

I am trying plan A in the meantime but if that doesn't work, what do you think I should say in my appeal? The NTK looks to be POFA compliant except for the absence of an invitation for the keeper to pay the charge.

Fruitcake

You are doing everything correctly, and yes the NTK looks to be PoFA compliant.

ParkingEye or PoPLA may dispute the photos because they do not have time stamps on them. You should look at the metadata and ensure the time the images were created has been recorded, and will need to include that data in your PoPLA appeal if it gets that far.

Plan A is of course a complaint to PALS and the head of the hospital trust/CEO, and your MP.

Local press might be interested as well.

LDast

Should it go to POPLA, what about the fact that there is no "invitation" for the keeper to pay the charge as required by POFA 9.2.e.i. whereby the notice must "invite" the keeper to pay the charge or if they were not the driver, to notify them of the drivers details etc.

As far as I can make out, without that specific invitation for the keeper to pay the charge, they cannot hold the keeper liable, only the driver.

Fruitcake

ParkingEye don't normally get this sort of thing wrong. They actually have two versions of the NTK. One with the PoFA wording and one without when they know they have failed to get the NTK out on time.

In your case, the NTK doesn't invite the keeper to supply them with the keeper's details either. Instead is says you "should" give them the driver's details, which is not what the PoFA says. Both are minor point, and should be mentioned, but PoPLA is not independent, so don't expect them to be winning points.
Saying "should" instead of "invite" has been challenged at PoPLA on several occasions, and complaints have been made to the BPA about it, but as far as I am aware, a PoPLA appeal has never been allowed for the use of the different wording.
You are not dealing with trained independent professionals. It wasn't that long ago that assessors and lead assessors couldn't count to fourteen.

Frustration of contract, pay machines out of action is a stronger point, especially supported by the photo evidence as long as you can prove when they were taken.

Plan A is still the best option.

Coupon-mad

I think this is splitting hairs.  It asks you to pay and asks for driver details.  It's a POFA NTK.

You may as well admit to driving.

But your photo evidence is great.  Send it (a screenshot of the photo so the date/time shows at the bottom) to PALS and ask why the Trust has failed to tell ParkingEye to cancel all PCNs that afternoon because look how many people who wanted to pay on exit, couldn't.

DEFINITELY get this in the local press (and tell PALS you will). The journalists will really like your photo.  And you will save other affected victims because PEye will have to cancel them all, due to your evidence.

GrannyKate

Can I suggest caution re this photo - there are considerable serious Information Governance/data protection issues related to identifying persons attending health facilities.  I would blur the faces of the non staff individuals both on this site and anything sent to the press to protect their privacy. 

LDast

Plan A strikes again. An email complaint to PALS with the Trust CEO copied in has resulted in the PCN being cancelled.

A slightly mealy mouthed response from the Parking Coordinator for the Hospital.

Good morning xxxxx,

PALS team have forwarded your email to me.

 Unfortunately, I was not in work on the 23rd of April. I am aware that the machine on the right hand side was out of action and as you can clearly see on the picture, engineers were on site to fix this machine.

 I can see at least 16 transactions between 14:00 and 15:00 at the left hand side machine on the 23rd. However, I am not sure if there was an intermittent issue with the machine at the time. Although this is not common, like any other technology, there can be issues at times. It was unfortunate that you were at the machine at that time.

 I can confirm that the Parking Charge has been cancelled. I have asked Parking Eye to send a confirmation letter. This should arrive by the end of next week. 

 xxxxxx/xxxxxx - XXXXXX - 23/04/2024 Status: Cancelled

 Have a good weekend.

 Regards

 

Binoy

 

Binoy Mathew

Car Parking Coordinator

iFM Car Parking Services

Royal Bolton Hospital