PPC Unsuccessful POPLA Appeal - what to do next?

JesterRIP

Hello all,

I received a PCN from a PPC (Car Parkers Anglia) for the Clink Road car park (Sea Palling, Norfolk) earlier in the year.  The reason was overstaying a stipulated limit as marked by the CCTV / ANPR cameras - paid for 1 hour, total time between photographs was 1 hour 21 minutes (although my Google Timeline states differently).

I appealed it initially with the PPC who rejected it as you'd expect.  In summary I raised the following points:

1.  I'd received their NTK in excess of the 14 days
2.  I was driving, but I wasn't parked for that duration - I'd set a reminder on my phone to return to the car to move it alongside the fence (still within the grounds) so I wasn't occupying a space, to wait for my daughter who'd needed to use the public restrooms.
3.  I'd read the signage but couldn't recall the entire time relating to entering and exiting as opposed to parking - requested a copy of it (as I live 70 miles away), which they did not send (but were happy to send to POPLA)
4.  That it was unreasonable to expect me accept entering into a contract simply by entering the facility without being able to read the signage until after I'm parked.
5.  Grace periods.

I then sent the appeal to POPLA and along with my original appeal info to the PPC, added that I understand (since the Beavis case) the £60 charge is a deterrent I feel it is unfair to add another £40 for being brave enough to challenge what I felt was an unfair process (my partner is a CEO and had this facility been staffed, I'd have simply been asked to move on in most cases).  I also added the fact I felt the signage wasn't clear enough to distinguish between the vehicle being correctly parked and simply being on site - and ultimately the cameras simply prove my vehicle was on the entrance / exit of the site at those particular times.

Here was their response:

Assessor summary of operator case

The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for parking beyond a stipulated time limit.

Assessor summary of your case

The appellant has provided a detailed account of events. For the purpose of my report, I have summarised the grounds into the following points, and have checked each point before coming to my conclusion. The appellant states that:

• They were not parked for the length of time stated and not occupying a space.

• It is unfair to add a further £40 for challenging the charge.

• The signage was not clear enough to distinguish between the vehicle being on site an being parked.

• It should make clear that you are being photographed from the second you enter to the second you exit.

• They received the PCN outside of the requirements of POFA 2012 beyond 14 days and their daughter will testify to this.

• The removed their vehicle within the time of the ticket.

• They should get an entrance grace period and an exit grace period according to the BPA. The appellant has commented on the operator’s evidence reiterating the grounds made in their initial statement. The appellant has provided a calendar reminder as evidence to support their appeal.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

When entering onto a privately managed car park such as this one, the motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage in place sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. Therefore, upon entry to the car park, it is the duty of the motorist to ensure they review the terms on the signage, and comply with them, when deciding to park. I acknowledge the calendar reminder attached. 

Whilst I recognise that the driver made payment, on this occasion they did not pay for the entirety of their stay. The operator has provided evidence that the driver did make payment, as vehicle registration was provided, but it was only enough to cover a 1 hour stay, whereas the driver stayed for 1 hour and 21 minutes, which was 21 minutes longer than permitted. In order to qualify for the time stayed the driver would have needed to pay another £1.50 for an additional hour in accordance with the terms and conditions set out on the signage upon entry to the site, which is to pay per hour used. It is the drivers responsibility to ensure that full payment is made for the duration of their visit.

The British Parking Association (BPA) has a Code of Practice which set the standards its parking operators need to comply with. Section 19.3 of the BPA Code of Practice says operators need to have signs that clearly set out the terms. In this case, the operator has provided images of the signage at the site, along with a site plan for the car park. I note that the appellant took time to find a space however, whilst I acknowledge the appellant’s circumstances, ultimately, by choosing to remain at the site, the appellant has confirmed that they have reviewed and understood its terms and conditions. A motorist must ensure they are happy with the terms prior to parking. Indeed, the signage outlines that the site is managed using ANPR cameras, so it is made clear upon entry that payment must cover the full stay as they will be clocked on entry and exit. The amount paid will therefore be compared against the total time on site regardless of the time on their ticket. I am satisfied therefore, from the evidence provided by the operator that the signage is indeed legible and conspicuous and clearly outlines the terms of parking on the site. I am satisfied the motorist was afforded ample opportunity to review the terms. I am also satisfied that from this signage a contract would have been formed.

Whilst I appreciate that the appellant may feel the clock should start from when they purchase the ticket, this is not the case on this site. The ANPR cameras monitor the entry and exit times of vehicles and are not connected to the payment machines or online payment methods. It is therefore the responsibility of the motorist to calculate the total amount of time they have stayed or intend to stay and to pay accordingly against the correct vehicle registration, as made clear on the signage, taking into account any queues or payment difficulties. By not doing so, as in this case, the driver risked being issued with a PCN for a breach of the terms. I appreciate that the appellant has stated they were not parked during some of their time on site however, as the vehicle has come to a halt for the purpose of stopping, parking, or waiting, it is therefore no longer in motion and is considered to be parked. Even if the driver is still in the vehicle with the engine switched on, or not parked within a bay this is considered to be gaining utility from the site. 

Additionally, searching for a space would be considered gaining utility from the site. Section 22.8 of the BPA Code of Practice states that the operator has seven months after the parking event in which to issue a non-POFA PCN. As the appellant has admitted to being the driver in their appeal to POPLA the operator did not need to rely on the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 when they issued the PCN. As such, as this is a non-POFA PCN the operator has seven months in which to issue it to the driver, and the evidence shows it was sent within seven months. POPLA’s remit is to determine if a charge has been issued correctly. If an appellant has a service-related grievance with the operator about the length of time the PCN took to arrive, it needs to be addressed with the operator directly as it has no bearing on the validity of the PCN.

Section 13.1 of the BPA Code of Practice requires parking operators to allow the driver a period of five minutes to read the signage and decide if they are going to stay or go if the site is one where parking is permitted. Section 13.2 goes on to say that a consideration period shall not apply where a parking event takes place. As the appellant has remained on site for a considerable period, they have gained utility of the site and a parking event has taken place and no consideration period should be given. Section 13.3 of the BPA Code of Practice requires parking operators to allow the driver 10 minutes to leave if parking is permitted for a limited amount of time or on paid car parks. Section 13.6 of the Code of Practice goes on to state that a grace period is not a period of free parking and as such does not form part of the terms of the site and is not required to be advertised on the signage. In this case, the appellant stayed for 21-minutes after their total parking time had expired. This exceeded the grace period by 11-minutes and as such a PCN was issued. Though I note that 10-minutes is a minimum, I am not convinced that the grace period needed extending on this occasion.

Section 20.7 of the BPA Code of Practice outlines that if a reduced payment is received within 14 days of issue the charge must be reduced by 40% to reflect reduced costs in collecting the charge. This is only required to be offered by the parking operator within the first 14 days after the issuing of a PCN, after which the charge amount will rise to 100%. The PCN attached shows that it was offered. I am satisfied that the operator has complied with the code. Additionally, it is made clear that if an appellant appeals through POPLA and they unsuccessful they will be liable for the full PCN amount. The is because the reduced amount is a settlement between the appellant and the operator, by appealing to POPLA the appellant is wishing to dispute this further and does not want to settle with the parking operator. They will therefore be liable for £100.

Ultimately, it is the motorist’s responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions of the car park. Upon consideration of the evidence, the driver did not make sufficient payment, and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal.

I really don't understand the part in bold - when they sent me the NTK they had no idea I was the driver - so the fact I had no ticket at the time, surely this makes no difference; the NTK should arrive within 14 days?

Any help would be greatly appreciated - thank you.

Gr1pr

If Popla rejected the appeal, then that process is over with 

Therefore, the only place this can be settled is in civil court within the next 6 years 

Ideally you get the landowner to cancel the PCN, plan A. ( Especially because plans B & C failed. )

They had 6 months to obtain keeper details and one month to get the PCN to the keeper, not 14 days 

POFA protects a keeper who was not the driver, it never assists a driver, Plus POFA is not a mandatory requirement, its optional 

Coupon-mad

You just ignore them. I don't know why people want a next step. Ignore them.

It won't go to court but - just in case - keep your address updated with them if you move, and check the letters are just demands and not a Court Claim.

Ignore the £170 threatograms; don't show us pleeeease... just read post 4 of the NEWBIES.

JesterRIP

Yes I had a look at the Newbies stuff so I certainly won't be boring you with any of that :-)

One thing I did see over and over again, was the "Plan A" - but in all honesty I have no idea how to find the land owner of this facility.

In a retail park it's pretty straightforward - and I'm ready to submit a heartfelt appeal to whoever owns this land.  But finding out who that is - is turning out to be a bit of a struggle (other than sending £4 to the HM Land Registry to find out I guess?)

Umkomaas

From time to time I post the following:

SOME IDEAS FOR DETERMINING WHO OWNS THE LAND 

1. Google searches

2. If a retail park, check on any signage which lists the on-site outlets

3. Ask retailers on the site if there is a managing agent

4. Ask retailers on the site to whom do they pay rent

5. Contact the local authority and ask who pays the non-domestic/business rate for the car park (some councils have a spreadsheet on their website)

6. Contact the local Valuation Office and ask if they know. They often have a website which might provide the information 

7. Contact The Land Registry and for around £3 they should be able to provide definitive detail

8. If you haven't already done so, give us the name of the car park/site/location, we may have seen other cases there.

JesterRIP

Umkomaas said:

From time to time I post the following:

SOME IDEAS FOR DETERMINING WHO OWNS THE LAND 

7. Contact The Land Registry and for around £3 they should be able to provide definitive detail

8. If you haven't already done so, give us the name of the car park/site/location, we may have seen other cases there.

Yes it is contained in the initial post - Car Parkers Anglia, Clink Road, Sea Palling, NR12 0AL

I've had a look on the HM Registry, and it lists it as "The Bungalow, Beach Road" (same postcode) 

Gr1pr

Car parkers anglia is on the signs, so is the parking company 

The latter may be the address for the Landowner, the LR entry