Parking Charge Notice: Reason for issue - "No valid parking payment found" ?!

LDast

...and which bit of the document I linked to was not understood? It is the new, improved recipe, private parking sector single Code of Practice. The operative word is "single". If you bothered to open the document you will be able to read the following in the foreword:

We are delighted to introduce the first version of a private parking sector single Code of Practice (“The Code”) for parking on private land.

This Code of Practice for the sector has been jointly created by the British Parking Association (BPA) and International Parking Community (IPC) and is largely based on the Government’s Private Parking Code of Practice which was initially published in February 2022 before being withdrawn in June 2022.

The BPA and IPC are continuing to raise standards by adopting a joint Code which comes into effect from the 27th June 2024.

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1260624.pdf

cs95aam

LDast said:

...and which bit of the document I linked to was not understood? It is the new, improved recipe, private parking sector single Code of Practice. The operative word is "single". If you bothered to open the document you will be able to read the following in the foreword:

We are delighted to introduce the first version of a private parking sector single Code of Practice (“The Code”) for parking on private land.

This Code of Practice for the sector has been jointly created by the British Parking Association (BPA) and International Parking Community (IPC) and is largely based on the Government’s Private Parking Code of Practice which was initially published in February 2022 before being withdrawn in June 2022.

The BPA and IPC are continuing to raise standards by adopting a joint Code which comes into effect from the 27th June 2024.

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1260624.pdf

"...and which bit of the document I linked to was not understood? ...If you bothered to open the document..."

Thanks, but remind me not to ever ask for help ever again in this forum, actually don't! That's the third time somebody has told me off on this thread, because they think they have the right to just because somebody asked for advice and they feel they are better and more able. I've spent years helping people in other matters without asking for a dime and I come here and all I get is attitude and berating. I hope you're never in the situation where your life depends on somebody else helping you. Good day to you.

fisherjim

cs95aam said:

LDast said:

...and which bit of the document I linked to was not understood? It is the new, improved recipe, private parking sector single Code of Practice. The operative word is "single". If you bothered to open the document you will be able to read the following in the foreword:

We are delighted to introduce the first version of a private parking sector single Code of Practice (“The Code”) for parking on private land.

This Code of Practice for the sector has been jointly created by the British Parking Association (BPA) and International Parking Community (IPC) and is largely based on the Government’s Private Parking Code of Practice which was initially published in February 2022 before being withdrawn in June 2022.

The BPA and IPC are continuing to raise standards by adopting a joint Code which comes into effect from the 27th June 2024.

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1260624.pdf

"...and which bit of the document I linked to was not understood? ...If you bothered to open the document..."

Thanks, but remind me not to ever ask for help ever again in this forum, actually don't! That's the third time somebody has told me off on this thread, because they think they have the right to just because somebody asked for advice and they feel they are better and more able. I've spent years helping people in other matters without asking for a dime and I come here and all I get is attitude and berating. I hope you're never in the situation where your life depends on somebody else helping you. Good day to you.

@cs95aam

Please don't get offended or take this personally, everyone on here volunteers to help people out every day, it just gets a bit frustrating when it looks like posts are ignored or the same questions asked again, this is the best forum for advice.

Redirect your frustrations on the PPC they are the ones that want you to feel got at, and if you deal with their greedy useless cohorts in this the debt collectors they will make you feel like a second class citizen it's the way they work.

No one on here is against you or wants you to fail it's just the whole sorry dirty system they have concocted to wear people down.

Rise above it and carry on we are all on your side believe me.

cs95aam

fisherjim said:

cs95aam said:

LDast said:

...and which bit of the document I linked to was not understood? It is the new, improved recipe, private parking sector single Code of Practice. The operative word is "single". If you bothered to open the document you will be able to read the following in the foreword:

We are delighted to introduce the first version of a private parking sector single Code of Practice (“The Code”) for parking on private land.

This Code of Practice for the sector has been jointly created by the British Parking Association (BPA) and International Parking Community (IPC) and is largely based on the Government’s Private Parking Code of Practice which was initially published in February 2022 before being withdrawn in June 2022.

The BPA and IPC are continuing to raise standards by adopting a joint Code which comes into effect from the 27th June 2024.

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW%20Redesigned%20Documents/sectorsingleCodeofPracticeVersion1260624.pdf

"...and which bit of the document I linked to was not understood? ...If you bothered to open the document..."

Thanks, but remind me not to ever ask for help ever again in this forum, actually don't! That's the third time somebody has told me off on this thread, because they think they have the right to just because somebody asked for advice and they feel they are better and more able. I've spent years helping people in other matters without asking for a dime and I come here and all I get is attitude and berating. I hope you're never in the situation where your life depends on somebody else helping you. Good day to you.

@cs95aam

Please don't get offended or take this personally, everyone on here volunteers to help people out every day, it just gets a bit frustrating when it looks like posts are ignored or the same questions asked again, this is the best forum for advice.

Redirect your frustrations on the PPC they are the ones that want you to feel got at, and if you deal with their greedy useless cohorts in this the debt collectors they will make you feel like a second class citizen it's the way they work.

No one on here is against you or wants you to fail it's just the whole sorry dirty system they have concocted to wear people down.

Rise above it and carry on we are all on your side believe me.

Thank you. I do appreciate everyone's help here but the experience was unpleasant. I do understand you all must get the same thing a lot but the person asking for help sometimes sees it as a new situation not covered by existing posts combined with the stress of the situation.

Asteria have rejected my appeal. It's as though they haven't even read my email. They've completely ignored the fact that they have broken their code. I will just go ahead and pay the £60 and treat it as a huge lesson learnt. They are scam artists and I hope one day they get their comeuppance. My only concern is that this isn't a one off and they could in theory charge me over and over going back to November 2023! To be honest I'm unsure about what to really do. Or should I appeal to the IAS? If that fails will I have to pay the full charge or £60? Sorry for the questions.

Your vehicle was observed as entering a site which requires a valid cashless parking session (Tap2Park) to be purchased against your vehicle registration. Your vehicle entered at 12:16 and exited at 12:22. Within this time you failed to purchase parking cover against your vehicle registration. As no parking cover was purchased, this PCN was subsequently issued. Notice of the terms and conditions of parking is served by way of numerous large warning signs. Please note you can visit our website; www.paymypcn.net whereby you can review photographs of this parking event. We note the contents of the appeal but reject your submissions. Asteria Parking took over the management of the car park in November 2023. All signage pertaining to the previous operator, Regent Parking, was completely removed on 13th December 2023 (7 months ago) and Asterias signage was erected on the same date. The signage at the site is both voluminous and strategically placed to be highly visible and obvious to all users of the car park. The signs are designed to ensure that the prevailing terms and conditions cannot be missed by anyone entering or using the car park. Therefore, the parking charge notice issued to you is valid., You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and you now have two options (you cannot do both): You can pay the discount amount due of £60.00 within 14 days or you can appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS) if you believe this decision is incorrect.

LDast

No one has suggested you pay anything to these scammers. You have a third option that they have not informed you of... you can simply ignore them and see if they ever decide to take you to court for the alleged debt.

It is all explained in the Newbies/FAQ thread. The only truly independent arbiter to your dilemma will be a judge, if it ever gets as far as that. If you do not flinch at the useless debt collector letters that will come your way, the may decide that there are easier victims to pursue.

cs95aam

LDast said:

No one has suggested you pay anything to these scammers. You have a third option that they have not informed you of... you can simply ignore them and see if they ever decide to take you to court for the alleged debt.

It is all explained in the Newbies/FAQ thread. The only truly independent arbiter to your dilemma will be a judge, if it ever gets as far as that. If you do not flinch at the useless debt collector letters that will come your way, the may decide that there are easier victims to pursue.

Apologies in advance for the long post. Thank you I've re-read the Newbies thread. Sounds like the IAS are useless too. However, I think I messed up my initial appeal with Asteria as I part used the MSE template and used the heading of "Insufficient Signage". I then went onto explain that you didn't have clear signage to state a change in terms of conditions as per the single code. Here is part of my letter:

• There is insufficient signage to indicate a change in terms and conditions

The car park in question has had a recent change in car parking operator, I was informed by Silverdine Restaurant who employ Asteria Parking Ltd. This change was from Regent Parking to Asteria Parking Ltd. Old signs belonging to Regent are still onsite. 

I quote the private parking sector’s SINGLE Code of Practice dated 27th June 2024, page 12. This Code of Practice for the sector has been jointly created by the British Parking Association (BPA) and International Parking Community (IPC), Asteria Parking Ltd is a member.

3.4. Material changes – notices

Where there is any material change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a driver entering controlled land that is or has been open for public parking, the parking operator must place additional (temporary) notices at the site entrance for a period of not less than 4 months from the date of the change making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who might be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur parking charges.

I also quote the IPC code 9th Edition 1st January 2024, page 30. 

Changes in Operator’s Terms and Conditions

Where there is any change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a person visiting the Car Park and which materially affects the Motorist the Operator should place additional (temporary) notices at the entrance making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who may be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur Parking Charges. Notices should be in addition to the signage ordinarily required and left in place for an appropriate period.

There has been no temporary signage placed by Asteria Parking Ltd to make it clear that new terms and conditions have been put in place. This is highly misleading practice and puts Asteria Parking Ltd in breach of The private Parking sector Single Code of Practice’s code of conduct. 

If I am to phrase a decent IAS appeal, is it fine to say that I have been parking there for longer than Asteria have been in operation there and Asteria have broken the code by not placing clear signs stating the change in terms of conditions? Now if the new single code of conduct only came into effect on 27th June 2024 and Asteria have been there since November 2023 can they not argue that it wasn't applicable?

We are delighted to introduce the first version of a private parking sector single Code of Practice (“The Code”) for parking on private land.

This Code of Practice for the sector has been jointly created by the British Parking Association (BPA) and International Parking Community (IPC) and is largely based on the Government’s Private Parking Code of Practice which was initially published in February 2022 before being withdrawn in June 2022.

The BPA and IPC are continuing to raise standards by adopting a joint Code which comes into effect from the 27th June 2024.

The IPC Code of Practice v.9.0 that I have is dated 1st January 2024, which fisherjim directed me to. I've found version 8, dated 1st July 2021 which also states the following:

Changes in Operator’s Terms and Conditions

Where there is any change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a person visiting the Car Park and which materially affects the Motorist the Operator should place additional (temporary) notices at the entrance making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who may be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur Parking Charges. 30 Notices should be in addition to the signage ordinarily required and left in place for an appropriate period.

Should I quote this because its what would have applied since November 2023 or should I stick to the latest single code? Thank you.

KeithP

cs95aam said:

...is it fine to say that I have been parking there for longer than Asteria have been in operation there...

I am just going to latch on to that phrase and make the point that perhaps you should not be giving away the driver's identity.
It might be fine to say "...the driver has been parking there..." but not "...I have been parking there...".

Coupon-mad

You don't need to do an IAS appeal and certainly won't be paying Asteria anything.

Just ignore them and stop parking there.

When you take something to a PO you can legally stop on a double yellow line (on-street) to take a parcel inside the premises.  Stay on street in future and use yellow lines for the exempt purposes they exist for.

cs95aam

I've made a mistake, somebody offline said I should appeal to the IAS, which I did and obviously that got rejected. Asteria came back with the same response as before. They completely ignored my comments about clear, temporary signage as per the private parking sector's single code of practice. I was following the MSE "Fight unfair private parking tickets" web page. Sorry 

Will the next step be a court date? Will I end up with a CCJ?

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 29/07/2024 13:40:25.

The operator reported that...

The appellant was the driver.

The appellant was the keeper.

The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA..

ANPR/CCTV was used.

The Notice to Keeper was sent on 10/07/2024.

A response was received from the Notice to Keeper.

The ticket was issued on 02/07/2024.

The Notice to Keeper (ANPR) was sent in accordance with PoFA.

The charge is based in Contract.

The operator made the following comments...

On the date of the parking event, the appellants vehicle was observed as entering a site which requires a valid cashless parking session (Tap2Park) to be purchased against your vehicle registration.

Their vehicle entered at 12:16 and exited at 12:22. Within this time the driver failed to purchase parking cover against their vehicle registration. As no parking cover was purchased, this PCN was subsequently issued.

We note the contents of the appellants appeal but it is the case that Asteria Parking took over the management of the car park in November 2023. All signage pertaining to the previous operator, Regent Parking, was completely removed on 13th December 2023 (7 months ago) and Asterias signage was erected on the same date.

The IPC have had site photos since December 2023 which show the current signage.

The signage at the site is both voluminous and strategically placed to be highly visible and obvious to all users of the car park. The signs are designed to ensure that the prevailing terms and conditions cannot be missed by anyone entering or using the car park.

Grizebeck

irrelevant follow previous advice