SABA Parking Charge Notice - Surely something to be done?

nochargebutchange

Any info on experience with SABA Parking post Popla appeal would be greatly welcomed. 

I received a charge notice from SABA after attempting to park at Stanmore station on the outskirts of London. 

My misdemeanor was that I entered the car park and could not find a space to park as the place was totally overloaded with traffic because of a football match at Wembley Stadium. I was stuck in a long queue as I circled back to the exit (with many cars just sitting stationary waiting for spaces to open up). I ended up staying in the car park without a ticket for more than the 15 min grace period (by just a few mins), but because of the overcrowding, not because I was parked or hanging around there. 

In the end I drove just down the road to Canon's Park, found a space, and paid for parking as normal. I feel this shows I wasn't trying to dodge fairs or get around paying for parking. 

To my surprise, I was issued the charge a few weeks later. I thought it was a scam because it seemed so wild to charge me for entering and leaving a car park without staying, but I can see that others have experienced similar behaviours. 

I appealed to Popla who, unsurprisingly, said the charge should stand (I am still unsure of how that organisation operates and how it is monitored or regulated). I am now worried/fearful of the next steps. Of course, the charge has increased with SABA demanding £170. 

Is there any further way to fight this? It seems unreasonable, predatory, unethical, and self serving (almost as if their business model is to survive from these charges rather than building sustainability and reputation in their brand). 

I can't afford the new charge, but equally I don't want to involve expensive solicitors to take it further. Most of all, it just seems unfair and paying anything would undermine any claim of innocence. 

Grizebeck

just follow the newbies
why would involve expensive solicitors, for what purpose

KeithP

Here is confirmation that Stanmore Station Car Park is subject to TfL Byelaws:-
www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tube_station_car_parks_2

This means that there is no way that any driver's liability can be transferred to the vehicle's keeper.
It follows therefore, you must not give away the driver's details.

Coupon-mad

Nobody needs to use a solicitor to dispute a private parking charge. We do this every day, including court. No CCJ or high costs are risked.  We succeed. This is easy for us.

Keep the evidence of paying for the other car park:

In the end I drove just down the road to Canon's Park, found a space, and paid for parking as normal. I feel this shows I wasn't trying to dodge fairs or get around paying for parking. 

Did you show POPLA that evidence of parking elsewhere and the evidence that there was a match on at Wembley? 

Please can you show the actual POPLA Decision in POPLA DECISIONS thread for us to see?  Add at least ten paragraph breaks into the decision blurb though! Thank you.  

nochargebutchange

I have trawled the 'newbie' tag - some really useful stuff. I am indeed a newbie so sorry for missing that. 

The match at Wembley was an England international match - there is certainly proof that it was there (4 stops along the line), along with 81,410 spectators + hundreds of staff, teams, media etc etc (not the reason I was there). 

I certainly have proof of payment for parking in the other SABA site although don't yet see how this is useful. 

It seems the general golden thread is to do nothing just yet and approach a 'time out' at six months. 

Here is a copy of the decision from Popla, which as I'm sure you know is 'final' and 'will not be considered further': 

When entering a site, it is the motorist’s responsibility to read the signs and adhere to the terms and conditions stated. In this case, the signs state payment is required after 15 minutes of arrival and payment instructions are provided. The evidence provided shows the vehicle was on site for 31 minutes.

The operator has provided a transaction report which shows no record of payment against the vehicle. Therefore, the terms and conditions of the site were breached, and a charge was issued for £100. 

The appellant states on the date in question, the car park was extremely busy due to the site being full as there was an England game at Wembley Stadium which is local.

The appellant states there were queues in the car park due to vehicles blocking the road which meant the driver could not park or leave the site.

The appellant states there is no signage to indicate that the site is full at the entrance and no barriers to prevent more vehicles from entering. The appellant states the driver left the site and found alternative parking elsewhere.

The British Parking Association (BPA) has a Code of Practice which set the standards its parking operators need to comply with. Section 13.1 of the Code requires parking operators to allow the driver a period of 5 minutes to read the signage and decide if they are going to stay or go if the site is one where parking is permitted.

Whilst I acknowledge the appellant’s comments, the motorist exceeded the consideration period by 26 minutes and therefore agreed to the terms and conditions for parking.

I appreciate there may have been traffic and congestion on site but there is no evidence to support this and therefore I am unable to consider an extension of the consideration period.

I note the appellant’s comments regarding the management techniques on site, POPLA’s sole role is to assess if the terms and conditions of the site were breached. If the appellant wishes to make a complaint about the management, they can contact the operator via their online complaints policy or contact the landowner directly.

The appellant has reiterated their original grounds of appeal after reviewing the operator’s case file. As I have addressed these issues above, I will not comment further. After considering the evidence from both parties, the motorist failed to make a valid payment and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. As such, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I must refuse the appeal.

Just to clarify, my earlier comment on involving solicitors comes from the 'unhappy with the decision' tab on the Popla decisions page which states: "You may wish to seek advice from the Citizen's Advice Bureau or seek independent legal advice." 

Castle

nochargebutchange said:

I have trawled the 'newbie' tag - some really useful stuff. I am indeed a newbie so sorry for missing that. 

The match at Wembley was an England international match - there is certainly proof that it was there (4 stops along the line), along with 81,410 spectators + hundreds of staff, teams, media etc etc (not the reason I was there). 

I certainly have proof of payment for parking in the other SABA site although don't yet see how this is useful. 

It seems the general golden thread is to do nothing just yet and approach a 'time out' at six months. 

That only applies to Penalty Charges, it's 6 years for Parking Charge Notices.

LDast

It would appear from that POPLA decision that no mention was made about no keeper liability. Did the Keeper give away the identity of the driver? Yes or no?

nochargebutchange

LDast said:

It would appear from that POPLA decision that no mention was made about no keeper liability. Did the Keeper give away the identity of the driver? Yes or no?

If I remember correctly, yes. 

I believe there is a box to tick as part of the appeal process which confirms the driver is the same as the keeper to whom they have addressed the PCN. 

But I will check as I cannot recall in full.

nochargebutchange

Castle said:

nochargebutchange said:

I have trawled the 'newbie' tag - some really useful stuff. I am indeed a newbie so sorry for missing that. 

The match at Wembley was an England international match - there is certainly proof that it was there (4 stops along the line), along with 81,410 spectators + hundreds of staff, teams, media etc etc (not the reason I was there). 

I certainly have proof of payment for parking in the other SABA site although don't yet see how this is useful. 

It seems the general golden thread is to do nothing just yet and approach a 'time out' at six months. 

That only applies to Penalty Charges, it's 6 years for Parking Charge Notices.

Ok, good to know. But also frustrating. Thanks for the note - really appreciate it. Will go back to the drawing board. 

Grizebeck

nochargebutchange said:

LDast said:

It would appear from that POPLA decision that no mention was made about no keeper liability. Did the Keeper give away the identity of the driver? Yes or no?

If I remember correctly, yes. 

I believe there is a box to tick as part of the appeal process which confirms the driver is the same as the keeper to whom they have addressed the PCN. 

But I will check as I cannot recall in full.

doesnt matter now just follow newbies

Coupon-mad

I certainly have proof of payment for parking in the other SABA site although don't yet see how this is useful.

That evidence (plus showing proof of the international match, not just stating that there was one) would have won the case at POPLA.  They have often found in favour of appellants who prove they left (due to not finding a space) and attach proof that they then parked elsewhere.

You would also have had 100% nailed on win if you'd simply appealed as registered keeper!

I wish you'd come and asked us before appealing but no worries.  You didn't park.  You owe nothing.  Easy to defend if they try a claim.

Do not pay and please don't show us the tedious £170 debt crawler letters you'll get.

Never ever appeal as admitted driver.