Euro Car Parks NTK - Wigan - POPLA Appeal Advice

TheYoungster

Good Morning.

I have prepared my POPLA appeal and would be grateful if the members could have a quick look and comment. 
The appeal is made up of  5 sections but i will only post my Grace Period & ANPR section.

 Signage & landowner sections have been taken directly from the forum. I have also removed the photos. 

1.      Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice

2.      No evidence to show the ANPR information is reliable 

3.

   Insufficient Signage 

4.    No Evidence of Landowner Authority 

5.    Planning permission for ANPR & Signage (I may not add this)

1.      Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice

The BPA’s Code of Practice states that a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before a PCN is issued.

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.3) states that:  “Where a parking location is one where a limited period of parking is permitted, or where drivers contract to park for a defined period and pay for that service in advance (Pay & Display), this would be considered as a parking event and a Grace Period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (A8.4) states that:   “If a driver is parking with your permission, they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the contract with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract.”

The BPA Code of Practice (13.3) clearly states that a Grace Period to leave the car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. it is reasonable to suggest that a grace period be applied to the entering of the car park and purchasing a P&D ticket.

Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking Association (BPA): The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket.”

“No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”

“The BPA’s guidance defines the ‘grace period’ as the time allowed after permitted or paid-for parking has expired but before any kind of enforcement takes place.”

The NTK submitted by the operator has the ‘Time in Car Park’ as  1 hour 10 minutes and the BCA clause 13.3 states “A grace period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN”.

 The above would indicate that in any reasonable interpretation that the seconds are de minimis and should not be taken into account.

It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question which Euro Car Parks claim an overstay of 10 minutes and 10 seconds on the entrance/exit times but is referenced at 10 minutes on the ‘Time in car park’ is not an unreasonable Grace Period.

It is also argued that the time of entrance 14.27 and the time on the P&D ticket at time of purchase of 14:32 can be explained by the following;

A.     Finding a parking space in a busy town centre car park (numerous parking bays where cordoned off because of sink holes).

B.     Locating and walking with a child to the P&D pay machine. This is quite a large carpark with only two machines at the entrance and King Street pedestrian exit. There are no pedestrian walkways in the carpark so care must be taken as cars are frequently driving around or driving in and out of parking bays.

C.      Queueing for the ticket machine (only two machines so can get busy)

D.     Finding the correct change for the machine as pay & displays machines rarely give change.

 Photograph of entrance image & time and purchased P&D ticket.

Regarding time leaving the carpark:

A.     Access the car with a young child.

B.     Making sure the child has their seat belt on.

C.      Pull out of parking bay carefully as bays are tight and it is a busy car park.

D.     Drive to the exit of the carpark, this is slow due to it being a tight carpark to navigate.

E.      The image of the car leaving the carpark shows it at the intersection waiting to join a busy one way system around wigan town centre. What it does not show is the traffic lights that are to the right of the exit that get extremely busy and traffic gets backed up past the exit of the carpark, because of this the driver can be reliant on another motorist letting them out, It is not inconceivable that it can take a couple of minutes to wait for a gap in the traffic and join the highway. The image does not define if the vehicle had just pulled up to the intersection or had been there for a time period waiting for break in the traffic. The operator must forward all evidence from the ANPR camera to clear this up.

F.      The exit time is printed above the image and does not make up part of the camera information (See No evidence to show the ANPR information is reliable below)

 

Image of vehicle leaving Rodney St. Carpark. (Photo taken as car is trying to join highway)

Image of road and traffic lights on exit of the carpark

  

1.        Evidence to show the ANPR information is reliable

This Operator is obliged to ensure their ANPR equipment is maintained as described in paragraph 22.3 of the British Parking Association's Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice. I require the Operator to present records as to the dates and times of when the cameras at this car park were checked, adjusted, calibrated, synchronised with the timer which stamps the photos and generally maintained to ensure the accuracy of the dates and times of any ANPR images. This is important because the entirety of the charge is founded on two images purporting to show the vehicle entering and exiting at specific times. It is vital that this Operator must produce evidence in response to these points and explain to POPLA how their system differs (if at all) from the flawed ANPR system which was wholly responsible for the court loss by the Operator in Parking Eye v Fox-Jones on 8 Nov 2013. That case was dismissed when the judge said the evidence form the Operator was 'fundamentally flawed' as the synchronisation of the camera pictures with the timer had been called into question and the operator could not rebut the point.
Euro Car Parks has not provided any evidence to show that their system is reliable, accurate or maintained. I request that you uphold my appeal based on this.

 

It is also a requirement under 22.1 of the British Parking Association's Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice to tell the drivers that you are using ANPR technology and what you will use the date for:

22.1 You may use ANPR camera technology to manage, control and enforce parking in private car parks, as long as you do this in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner. Your signs at the car park must tell drivers that you are using this technology and what you will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for.

The sign below is the only sign that is in clear view as you approach the entrance. As detailed in the photo below it is nearly impossible to read the writing on the sign before entering.

I do not believe the signage on entering the carpark at Rodney Street car park provides adequate information on the usage of the technology and would request the operator forward evidence that contradicts this. No close up photos as this is not realistic when driving.

Image of the approach to carpark showing obstructed Signage

 

Entrance to carpark Signage taken by a passenger whilst driving up to it.

View of signage from (Approximate) parking bay

1.      Insufficient Signage

Gr1pr

It doesn't mention the version of the BPA CoP you are using, personally I would state it, so there is no ambiguity, I assume that you are using version 9. ?  The latest one, as your source. ?

TheYoungster

I have version 8, i will update to version 9 and reference it. Cheers.

Gr1pr

TheYoungster said:

I have version 8, i will update to version 9 and reference it. Cheers.

I did wonder, because the PCN is from this year and the version 9 is this year too, even though it may be exactly the same under those sections, perhaps add the version number 9 to the header for a start , but be very specific with sources, BPA CoP version 9, POFA 2012 , etc

Perhaps add that waiting for a space is not parking, plus time taken to leave the car park in busy periods is also not parking, if you haven't already ( you cannot add any new submissions or evidence to the appeal after it is submitted. )

Coupon-mad

Remove point 5.

Change all this (below) instead to a specific account of what happened in YOUR case.

Was it busy? Finding a space took two minutes at least? How did you pay? How long did that take? This is too generic for POPLA. Tell the story and point out to POPLA that this disingenuous chancer of an operator is pretending that ten minutes ten seconds (where the ten seconds is due to giving way to the main road traffic) isn't within the range of a reasonable grace period, which is absurd:

It is also argued that the time of entrance 14.27 and the time on the P&D ticket at time of purchase of 14:32 can be explained by the following;
A.      Finding a parking space in a busy town centre car park (numerous parking bays where cordoned off because of sink holes).
B.      Locating and walking with a child to the P&D pay machine. This is quite a large carpark with only two machines at the entrance and King Street pedestrian exit. There are no pedestrian walkways in the carpark so care must be taken as cars are frequently driving around or driving in and out of parking bays. 
C.       Queueing for the ticket machine (only two machines so can get busy)
D.      Finding the correct change for the machine as pay & displays machines rarely give change.

TheYoungster

Thanks for the advice, i will make the changes. 

I will let you all know how i get on with the appeal.

Thanks again to everyone for all your help. 

Gr1pr

Once its in , you will be back if they upload their evidence pack, in order for you to add your popla comments 

Or

You will be back telling us that the Claimant discontinued, no contest, dropped out 

TheYoungster

Hi all,

One last one before i send. 
I have added the 2024 Version 9 reference tot he BCA COP, and made the experience into the first person. 

I think i have a pretty solid case now, but who knows! 

The event re-written in the first person

The NTK issued by the operator has the ‘Time in Car Park’ as  1 hour 10 minutes and the BCA clause 13.3 states “A grace period of at least 10 minutes must be added to the end of a parking event before you issue a PCN”.

 The above would indicate that in any reasonable interpretation that the seconds are de minimis and should not be taken into account.

It is therefore argued that the duration of visit in question which Euro Car Parks claim an overstay of  10 minutes and 10 seconds on the entrance/exit times but is referenced at 10 minutes on the ‘Time in car park’ is not an unreasonable Grace Period.

Taking the above into account this Carpark operator is proposing that ten minutes ten seconds (where the ten seconds is due to giving way to the main road traffic) isn't within the range of a reasonable grace period!.

It is also argued that the time of entrance 14.27 and the time on the P&D ticket at time of purchase of 14:32 can be explained by the following;

I entered the carpark at 14:27 and drove around trying to find a carpark space. The carpark was really busy so this took a few minutes, I then found a space and attempted to park. The car in the next bay was to close to the lines making it to difficult to open my door and exit the car. I then pulled out of the space and drove around to find another space, this added another minute or two to my parking. There were numerous parking bays that where cordoned off because of sink holes.

Then we (with my child) had to walk to the P&D pay machine. This is quite a large carpark with only two machines at the entrance and King Street pedestrian exit. There are no pedestrian walkways in the carpark so care must be taken as cars are frequently driving around or driving in and out of parking bays, we were parked on the other side of the carpark to the pay machines.

Once we reached the pay machines there was a another person already at the machine, so we had to queue whilst he was purchasing his ticket. Following getting to the front of the queue I entered my reg, as the lettering is really small and hard to read, this takes a few seconds to correctly input. Also finding the correct change for the machine as pay & displays machines rarely give change.

As detailed in the below images, the above details the 5 minutes between entering the carpark and purchasing the ticket.

 

Photograph of entrance image & time and purchased P&D ticket.

Regarding time leaving the carpark:

Returning back to the car, I had to access the car with a young child, making sure the child has their seat belt on once in the car. I then pulled out of the parking bay carefully as bays are tight and it is a busy car park. Once out I drove to the exit of the carpark, this is slow due to it being a tight carpark to navigate.

The image of my vehicle leaving the carpark shows it at the intersection whilst I was waiting to join a busy one way system around wigan town Centre. What it does not show is the traffic lights that are to the right of the exit that was extremely busy, because of this I was reliant on another motorist letting me out, this took anything from 30 seconds to a minute, much more than the 10 seconds overstay detailed by the operator. Also the image does not define if the vehicle had just pulled up to the intersection or had been there for a few seconds before the image was taken.  

As the operators case is based on a  10 second overstay and the vehicle ‘exit time’ is printed above the image and does not make up part of the camera information, I feel I am justified to request all recorded (not still images) evidence from the ANPR camera.

 

Image of vehicle leaving Rodney St. Carpark. (Photo taken as car is trying to join highway)

TheYoungster

I have also had to remove the below as it doesn't appear in the BCA COP version 9.
Just beware if you copy and paste. 

It is also a requirement under 22.1 of the British Parking Association's Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice to tell the drivers that you are using ANPR technology and what you will use the date for:

22.1 You may use ANPR camera technology to manage, control and enforce parking in private car parks, as long as you do this in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner. Your signs at the car park must tell drivers that you are using this technology and what you will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for.

Coupon-mad

TheYoungster said:

I have also had to remove the below as it doesn't appear in the BCA COP version 9.
Just beware if you copy and paste. 

It is also a requirement under 22.1 of the British Parking Association's Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice to tell the drivers that you are using ANPR technology and what you will use the date for:

22.1 You may use ANPR camera technology to manage, control and enforce parking in private car parks, as long as you do this in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner. Your signs at the car park must tell drivers that you are using this technology and what you will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for.

Surely that clause is elsewhere in the CoP v9?