Euro Car Parks PCN

sniper7

Hello,

I’m seeking some advice please. 

I received a PCN from Euro Car Parks in the post today, addressed to me as Keeper of the vehicle.

The driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence, did in fact purchase a ticket for the duration of the car park stay, and displayed it in the vehicle but they only entered the first part of the registration number and forgot the last 3 digits. The ticket purchased is still in the vehicle door pocket as evidence. 

What is the best way to proceed in this situation please? Any advice is gratefully received.

sniper7

Here’s a photo of the ticket for reference. 

Gr1pr

So a major keying error 

Probably best to appeal it as keeper as a keying error by the driver and if possible add a copy of the parking receipt as proof 

ECP should then offer the £20 settlement as explained in the BPA CoP version 9, as full and final settlement of the PCN in their reply 

Nellymoser

Did the driver forget to enter last 3 digits or did the machine not print them? Looking at the margin layout of your ticket there doesn't appear to enough space to print a full registration number. 

sniper7

Nellymoser said:

Did the driver forget to enter last 3 digits or did the machine not print them? Looking at the margin layout of your ticket there doesn't appear to enough space to print a full registration number. 

Thanks for replying. The driver informs me that they thought they had input the whole registration number. 

Coupon-mad

Is the NTK POFA worded or not?

Please don't show us. We want you to see for yourself by comparing it to the NTK pictures thread linked in the Newbies FAQS thread.

sniper7

Coupon-mad said:

Is the NTK POFA worded or not?

Please don't show us. We want you to see for yourself by comparing it to the NTK pictures thread linked in the Newbies FAQS thread.

Hello,

I've just checked and the NTK is POFA worded.

What would you advise from here, please?

Gr1pr

Your choices are 

1) name the driver and they could appeal it based on the premise that the machine was faulty ( gets you out of the process as a non driving keeper. ) , or they can try for the £20 keying error option as a quick resolution 

2) use the £20 keying error option if you want a quick resolution 

3) go all out as a faulty machine and take your chances 

The fee was paid in this recent Excel case below and the judges both decided that it was de minimis and the defendant won, Excel lost their appeal 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80844739#Comment_80844739?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=excel+keying+error+

Not forgetting plan A, complaining to the landowner or managing agent or business and getting it cancelled ASAP 

sniper7

Gr1pr said:

Your choices are 

1) name the driver and they could appeal it based on the premise that the machine was faulty ( gets you out of the process as a non driving keeper. ) , or they can try for the £20 keying error option as a quick resolution 

2) use the £20 keying error option if you want a quick resolution 

3) go all out as a faulty machine and take your chances 

The fee was paid in this recent Excel case below and the judges both decided that it was de minimis and the defendant won, Excel lost their appeal 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/80844739#Comment_80844739?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=excel+keying+error+

Not forgetting plan A, complaining to the landowner or managing agent or business and getting it cancelled ASAP 

Thank you,

Do you know if there is a case that has been successful based on that recent ruling? Really interesting - Surely a precedent has been set by the two Judges both deciding that as long as the parking company received payment, it is de minimis? Or I am just being far too simplistic in my understanding here?

Thanks again.

Gr1pr

I would say that the appeal case above was too recent for ANY other case to be based on it

But if it had been a BPA AOS compliance case and if the £20 keying error option had been offered, then who knows what the outcome would have been. ?

I gave you all your options that are available to you, so you must decide on which path you as keeper are going to follow based on these and the information provided by the BPA CoP and possibly that court ruling ( a ruling that probably has similar weight to the arguments as did the Jopson case regarding unloading and loading as opposed to parking. , not that the Jopson case applies to keying errors, but Homeguard lost at the appeal stage )

sniper7

Gr1pr said:

I would say that the appeal case above was too recent for ANY other case to be based on it

But if it had been a BPA AOS compliance case and if the £20 keying error option had been offered, then who knows what the outcome would have been. ?

I gave you all your options that are available to you, so you must decide on which path you as keeper are going to follow based on these and the information provided by the BPA CoP and possibly that court ruling ( a ruling that probably has similar weight to the arguments as did the Jopson case regarding unloading and loading as opposed to parking. , not that the Jopson case applies to keying errors, but Homeguard lost at the appeal stage )

I'm grateful, thank you.