Parking Ticket for Parking in undersized bay: Widney Manor Park and Ride

MajorDanby

I am just about to complain to my MP. I thought I would share here to give other people a rough template. Any additional feedback welcomed.

Coupon-mad

Looks very good indeed.

MajorDanby

I thought I would share an update of the IAS appeals process. VCS have responded with the following:

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on xxx

The operator reported that...
The appellant was the driver.
A manual ticket was placed on the vehicle.
The ticket was issued on xxx
The charge is based in Contract.
The operator made the following comments...
1. The Centro Widney Manor North Station Park And Ride Car Park is private land which motorists are allowed to enter to park their vehicle provided that they abide by any displayed conditions of parking.

2. The signage on site states ‘Park only between the lines of a single marked bay''.

3. Site signage makes it clear that anyone observed to be in contravention of these Terms and Conditions will become liable for a PCN.

4. Site photos and supplied show that VCS signage is appropriately located within the site.

5. Enforcement for parking contraventions at this car site is undertaken by POs who record details of any vehicle and its registration number, which may be parked in contravention of the advertised Terms & Conditions. The Parking Charge Notice issued by the PO is affixed to the vehicle.

6. A series of images were taken showing the location of the vehicle in relation to the signs on site, they are time and date stamped.

7. The Patrol Officer (PO) observed the appellant's vehicle in situ. When recording the contravention the PO noted “not parked correctly in a bay parked with drivers side front and back wheels over the bay marking.” Contravention photographs supplied, which are time and date stamped, corroborate the PO's observations and show the appellant's vehicle parked over the lines of the bay, into the roadway.

8. The appellant does not dispute the facts of the recorded contravention.

9. The circumstances upon the day cited by the appellant do not warrant the cancellation of this notice. The contract between the appellant and VCS was formed when the motorist entered the car park. When entering this private land, a motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide by the conditions advertised in return for permission to enter. It is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they abide by any clearly displayed terms and conditions. It is clear that the terms and conditions stated that vehicles must park only between the lines of a single marked bay; otherwise the motorist would face liability for a Charge Notice. The adjudicator will note that the appellant had the opportunity to leave the site if they could not comply with the terms and conditions.

10. The size of the bays is a matter for the landowner. Ultimately, if there was any confusion over whether the area was a parking bay, whether they were authorised to park outside of the markings, or if they judged their vehicle unable to park correctly for any reason, they could have contacted the helpline for advice or sought alternative parking.

11. The appellant states the entrance sign does not list the requirement to park within a single marked bay. The supplied signage proofs show the entrance sign clearly states “Please refer to the full Terms and Conditions signs located around the car park”. The appellant has supplied an image of one of the full Terms and Conditions signs themselves, which shows the bay restriction was clearly advertised.

12. We maintain that our signs are clearly visible and meet the requirements set by the International Parking Community guidelines. As established members of the International Parking Community, we adhere to their Code of Practice. This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the car park. The signs within the car park fully comply with the recommendations outlined in the Code of Practice (including the size, wording and positioning) and are therefore deemed reasonable. Once the presence of the signs is revealed, it is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they have read the signs and are familiar with the Terms and Conditions.

13. Other vehicles parking incorrectly bear no relevance to this charge and do not constitute grounds for the cancellation of this Notice. It is the motorist's sole responsibility to ensure that they are parked in full compliance with the Terms and Conditions of parking, as outlined on the signage on site.

14. We must advise that Vehicle Control Services Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of Excel Parking Services and operates as a group company. The administrative team who process and deal with Parking Charge Notices do so for both our Company brands and utilise the same back office system; as such data is available within our group. The correspondence sent to the appellant in relation to the issue of this PCN and their appeal (supplied) was correctly sent.

15. A copy of our authority to manage parking on this site, including where the appellant parked their vehicle was supplied as part of the IPC audit process and is available solely to the Adjudicator for their perusal.



16. Ultimately, when entering this private car park it was the sole responsibility of the motorist to fully comply with the clearly advertised contractual terms and conditions of parking, by their failure to do so the appellant became liable for the PCN, which was lawfully issued.

17. The appellant became liable for a Charge Notice as per the Terms and Conditions displayed by parking beyond the markings of a single parking bay.

MajorDanby

My response:

1.      It is denied that the Appellant entered into a relevant contract with Vehicle Control Services, (“VCS”) due to failures to confirm to the requirements under ‘The private parking sector single Code of Practise’, (“CoP”) and therefore cannot be held liable for any subsequent invoices.

 

As a matter of contract law, drivers need to be given an appropriate opportunity to understand and decide whether to accept the terms and conditions that apply should they choose to park a vehicle on controlled land…

 

2.      Specifically:

3.1.3. Signs within controlled land displaying the specific terms and conditions applying must: a) be placed within the controlled land, such that drivers have the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle; b) be sufficiently large to be visible from a distance and legible on approach…

 

The images shown in xxx are taken from the viewpoint of the vehicle at the specific parking bay and clearly show vehicles significantly obscuring all additional carpark signage to the extent that it was not possible for the Appellant to have a chance to read additional terms and conditions at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Furthermore, the entrance signage is not legible when driving into the carpark at normal driving speeds, nor is there time to read and understand the detailed terms and conditions. At no time was the Appellant aware of entering into any relevant contract

 

3.      The following paragraphs are direct responses to the operators Prima Facie Case submitted to the Independent Appeals Service.

 

4.     (1) At no point in time was the driver aware that by parking in the Centro Widney Manor North Station And Park and Ride Car Park they had entered into a relevant contract with VCS. The images provided by the Appellant show any additional signage was obscured and illegible from the parking location

 

5.      (2), (3) In specific locations in the carpark, including the location of the alleged contravention, signage is not visible and therefore can not be read at the time of parking or leaving the vehicle

 

6.      (4) The site photos provided are stock images of carpark signage and bear no relevance to either the specific location of the alleged contravention nor are they reflective of the environmental or lighting conditions at the specific time

 

7.      (6) The images taken at the time of the alleged contravention do not include any images showing the location of the vehicle in relation to nearby signage. Indeed, the only image provided by the operator is an out of focus, close up view of the signage that is presumably located behind, and obscured by, a parked vehicle.

 

8.      (7) The observations of the Patrol Officer are irrelevant as it is denied that the Appellant was aware of contractual terms and conditions associated with usage of the carpark

 

9.      (8) The Appellant does not dispute the vehicle was parked outside of a marked bay, but does dispute that they entered into a relevant contract

 

10.  (9) The entrance signage, even if it were in a sufficiently sized font to read when entering at a normal driving speed does not articulate the requirement to park within marked bays. It has been shown that additional carpark signage at the specific location does not comply with CoP 3.1.3

 

11.  (11) Signage is not compliant with CoP 3.1.3. The image of the signage supplied by the Appellant is a copy of the image taken by the operator at the time of the alleged contravention

 

12.  (12) The assertations regarding the signage of the operator are irrelevant, in contract law, for a relevant contract to be entered into, an individual must be given the opportunity to understand and decide whether to accept a contract. It is denied that the Appellant understood they were entering into a contract, a primary driver of which was additional signage not compliant with CoP 3.1.3

 

13.  (16) It is clear, both within contract law and under the CoP that an operator has an obligation to provide suitable signed to ensure that any user of a private car park has a clear understanding the contract they are entering into. It is denied the Appellant was aware that they were entering a relevant contract

 

 

 

D_P_Dance

Para 13 "signage" not "signed".

IMO, some of these so called contracts are to long, to hign, too wordy, and too small to expect someone who wishes to park a car to read.  

MajorDanby

Most excellent news. After TfWM were completely intractable when requested to cancel the PCN, it appears my letter to my MP was successful.

I still plan on progressing the matter with TfWM as I feel that I have an in here to cast some transparency on the behaviours of their agents.

Thanks to all here for the help and support.

Coupon-mad

MajorDanby said:

Most excellent news. After TfWM were completely intractable when requested to cancel the PCN, it appears my letter to my MP was successful.

I still plan on progressing the matter with TfWM as I feel that I have an in here to cast some transparency on the behaviours of their agents.

Thanks to all here for the help and support.

Well done you and well done that MP.

Do follow it up. Those bays require measuring and repainting and Excel should be sacked, IMHO.

What would also be great id if you could get this in the local press.  It's a good story and of local interest to motorists. Do mention MSE forum. We want more people to know.