UKPC - Received two parking fines (advise needed)

mpdeejay

Hi everyone,

I have received two parking fines from the same establishment for exceeding the time limit of 90 minutes. One offence was for a duration of over 2 hours, and another just under 2 hours (neither within the 10 minute grace-period unfortunately).

My issue with this is that the car wasn't actually parked for the full duration of the stay, as this was a McDonald's services car park where the car had been frequented in and out of the parking bays to use the establishment.

I tried complaining directly to McDonald's regarding the charges via e-mail but I've received no response.

After appealing both charges back to UKPC, I have received two different responses back. For the longer stay, they've responded saying they've completed their assessment and consider the parking charge to be correctly issued. And for the shorter stay, they have requested for full name of the address and driver to assist in making a decision.

I'm just not really sure what to do next, I'm honestly considering just paying the fines to get this off my back but if anyone has any advice I would really appreciate it, even if that advise is to tell me I'm totally liable to pay this fine and I shouldn't be appealing it in the first place.

LDast

Have you read the Newbies/FAQ thread yet?

No one who comes here for advice pays a penny to UKPC. Follow the advice and they will, in due course discontinue.

mpdeejay

I did the 'Plan A', going directly to the retailer but like I say, no reply.

I sent my appeals to UKPC using the template and re-wrote slightly to match my situation, one appeal was returned with a POPLA code and the other appeal requested for full name and address of the driver which I'm presuming I shouldn't do.

Should I be obtaining POPLA codes for both charges and raising a POPLA appeal? There's a lot of information on the Newbies/FAQ it's a bit overwhelming. I also tried searching for an example similar to mine but all the UKPC incidents I found were either within the 'grace-period' or for parking outside of the parking bay lines. 

For my charges, they state the maximum duration of stay is 90 minutes, with cameras picking up from entering/leaving so even though I wasn't parked for more than 90 minutes at a time, I was still on the premises for over 90 minutes.

Fruitcake

They are neither fines nor offences.

Nobody here will ever suggest you pay an unregulated private parking company, one of many referred to by UK MPs across all parties as rogues, scammers, and bloodsuckers, especially not one that was previously caught doctoring time stamps on their photographic "evidence."

Complain to the UK CEO of McDonald's, and your MP.

For the one, appeal to PoPLA.
For the other, wait for the rejection and PoPLA code, then appeal that one as well.

Use all the points available to you from the third post of the NEWBIES. These should include, but not be limited to,

1) Non-PoFA compliant NTK/NTH (if appropriate)
2) Not the driver/not the person who may be liable for the charge (if non-PoFA)
3) Not the landowner/ No landowner contract
4) No standing to issue charges in their own name
5) Inadequate signage

6) BPA CoP failures (if appropriate)

Note that UKPC signs are always inadequate because the charge for breaching parking terms is always in tiny font, and therefore incapable of forming a contract with a motorist. Get photos of the site and signage, especially photos taken from a car length away.

Please also clarify what you mean by, "My issue with this is that the car wasn't actually parked for the full duration of the stay, as this was a McDonald's services car park where the car had been frequented in and out of the parking bays to use the establishment."

Was more than one visit made during each alleged parking period?

You are right though that ANPR scameras do not, cannot, record parking time, only time on site. You should put the PPC to strict proof that the vehicle was parked for the period they claim, and not driving in or out, waiting for a space, or slowly making it's way through a queue at the drive-through.

mpdeejay

Fruitcake said:

You are right though that ANPR scameras do not, cannot, record parking time, only time on site. You should put the PPC to strict proof that the vehicle was parked for the period they claim, and not driving in or out, waiting for a space, or slowly making it's way through a queue at the drive-through.

I'll add this to my PoPLA appeal, I'm not that great with writing stuff like this, so anyone, feel free to correct me or direct me in a better angle:

UKPC's ANPR cameras on the site do not, cannot, record parking time, only time on site. This vehicle was not parked within the designated bays during the full time that UKPC claim for the duration of stay. 

During the time stated, this car would have been slowing making it's way through the drive-thru, waiting for an available parking space, and also leaving/returning the parking bays to re-use the McDonald's drive-thru facilities on-site.

I would expect strict proof from UKPC of the usage of this vehicle while on the property, not just an arrival and return from the entrance of the property.

Fruitcake said:

Please also clarify what you mean by, "My issue with this is that the car wasn't actually parked for the full duration of the stay, as this was a McDonald's services car park where the car had been frequented in and out of the parking bays to use the establishment."

Was more than one visit made during each alleged parking period?

Yes, more than one 'visit' was made during each parking period, but not outside of the premises where the ANPR cameras are. There's only one entrance to the area, which takes you to the car park and McDonald's. So the car left and returned back into the parking bays during the each alleged parking period but didn't technically leave the premises which is being monitored by UKPC.

Their signs just say '90 minutes maximum stay', so I guess they've worded that well to not allow for defendants to use their whereabouts in defense, even if they weren't in a specific parking space for less than 90 minutes.

Fruitcake

I would amend this,

"This vehicle was not parked within the designated bays during the full time that UKPC claim for the duration of stay. 

During the time stated, this car would have been was not parked for the whole duration of the time on site, but was also slowing making it's way through the drive-thru, waiting for an available parking space, and also leaving/returning the parking bays to re-use the McDonald's drive-thru facilities on-site.
UKPC are put to strict proof that the contrary is true.

I would expect require strict proof from UKPC of the usage of this vehicle while on the property, not just an arrival and return from the entrance of the property.


Does the vehicle have a dashcam that would show the vehicle moving through the drive through and entering/leaving a parking space?

mpdeejay

Fruitcake said:

Does the vehicle have a dashcam that would show the vehicle moving through the drive through and entering/leaving a parking space?

No dashcam unfortunately.

On the third page for NEWBIES, there's lots of templates that mention ParkingEye, and the UKPC are mostly Windscreen tickets, no NTK etc.

Is it worth appealing with only the: Not the landowner/ No landowner contract, No standing to issue charges in their own name, Inadequate signage?

I'm worried this is just going to come back from PoPLA with a rejection and I end up missing the early payment discount. At this point I don't have the time/energy to pursue this and would rather just pay the fine and get it out of my hair...

KeithP

mpdeejay said:

At this point I don't have the time/energy to pursue this and would rather just pay the fine and get it out of my hair...

You must do what you think best.
You have been freely offered good advice and guidance but ultimately it is your choice on what happens next.

patient_dream

TOTAL PROOF THAT ANPR is NOT suitable for car parks with multiple outlets

 Waiting or go through a DRIVE-THU is NOT parking

UKPC know this so this is try on hoping you are a mug

Nor surprise that McDonalds know all about the scam that operates in their car parks .... THEY APPROVE

Coupon-mad

mpdeejay said:

I'm worried this is just going to come back from PoPLA with a rejection and I end up missing the early payment discount. At this point I don't have the time/energy to pursue this and would rather just pay the fine and get it out of my hair...

We wouldn't. This is about a scam industry. The NEWBIES thread clearly says ignore the bribe (discount).

And no-one here pays just because they might lose at POPLA, nor even if they DO lose at POPLA.