PCN on Free car park at GP surgery during appointment as a patient

Bazarius

I really don’t understand the underlying reasons or legal basis to counterclaim for £5k ? They are bound by the code to offer the £20 . It isn’t limited to keying errors .

The relevant code states

In these instances we would expect that such errors are dealt with appropriately at the first appeal stage, especially if it can be proven that the motorist has paid for the parking event or that the motorist attempted to enter their VRM or were a legitimate user of the car park (eg a hospital patient or a patron of a restaurant).

It is appreciated that in issuing a PCN in these instances, the operator will have incurred charges including but not limited to the DVLA fee and other processing costs therefore we believe that it is reasonable to seek to recover some of these costs by making a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period from when the keying error was identified before reverting to the charge amount at the point of appeal.

You’d have better luck applying to get the claim struck out with Yamba or other lawyers who specialise in parking cases claiming costs from them if you are willing to front £205 for your CC

Smellopee

Sorry @Bazarius I don't understand your point. I have stated the legal basis in the counterclaim @Coupon-mad reviewed. The car park is free and a patient-only car park which CEL have been contracted to ensure it stays available for patient (have an email from surgery manager stating this). I provided proof of appointment. CEL have been harassing me on the basis of a contract breach.

When opffering the £20, CEL has characterised the situation as a keying error, not a deliberate breach. You cannot simultaneously classify something as a keying error under a provision for genuine users and assert it as a contractual breach. The BPA Code of Practice exists to prevent genuine users being charged for registration failures. CEL's invocation of paragraph 17.4 is an acknowledgment that their own trade body regards this as a case where enforcement is not warranted at the full rate. By offering a BPA paragraph 17.4 reduced rate and then pursuing full enforcement when that offer was declined, CEL may have breached its own accreditation conditions. At worse surely they can only take me to court for the £20, not the random £170 plus add ons?

Gr1pr

The Money Claim would be for the full £100, plus court fees and legal fees, plus the added £70 debt collectors fee of £70, plus interest , typically between £250 and £300, in other words, the total on your claim form £287.85p , if they pay for a hearing

Smellopee

Thanks @Gr1pr that's exactly what it is. But if those partially hidden entries are mine (which CEL never brought up) then I think it would qualify as a minor keying error ( my number plate ends with the same two letters so for exemple i pressed MM instead of NN) and the PCN be cancelled but instead they gave me a reduced £20 fee for a major keying error after I provided proof of appointment.

Gr1pr

Yeah, I get that, but it would be up to the judge in court to decide if your arguments are valid or not

The only thing I can say is that the £70 plus interest charges would be likely to be removed, so a typical loss in court is about £212 , the other charges are standard legal and court fees, not the inflated £170 which should be £100

Coupon-mad

I think you do have causation to counterclaim (they frightened you away from your GP surgery when you were undergoing significant treatment, for heaven's sake) but I'd stick to maybe a (more likely to be considered by a judge) £1500*, and refer to the Vento bands, the PFHA, the 'thin skull rule' and Ferguson v British Gas to show how reasonably you are setting the level of your remedy for severe distress and interruption of your care pathway by this parasite firm.

https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/court-fees

* That costs £80 fee

James_Poisson

"When opffering (sic) the £20, CEL has characterised the situation as a keying error, not a deliberate breach"

Sorry but you are barking up the wrong tree with that one, you are characterising that as a keying error offer, they just gave you the option of the £20 admin fee offer, this has been in place long before keying errors were ever mentioned in any COP.

You turned that down, they will likely state you had the chance to make it all go away for £20 which covered their costs at the time, it was your error and you allowed the process to continue when you could have stopped it.

These are devious people I hope you succeed but I think the bar is high.

Smellopee

Thanks @Coupon-mad what about recovery of cost on time spent? I've now recorded 97.75h at £24 that's £2346, is this part of the counterclaim?

@James_Poisson THEY stated they offered a £20 reduction as THEY qualified the situation as a major keying error offer in their letter when in fact they might have had the data that it was only a minor keying error which means the PCN should have been cancelled. Why should I pay a nuisance payment demand as an authorised user of a free car park? I hope you bothered reading the full thread before making that sort of comment, it isn't helpful.

Coupon-mad

Costs are not part of the counterclaim, they are separate and you don't list them yet.

"Why should I pay a nuisance payment demand as an authorised user of a free car park?"

I agree with you and what others seem to have missed IMHO, is that the CC isn't actually pleaded about this PCN.

It's not really about whether you could have escaped THIS PCN by paying their jumped up admin fee. And why should you? And even if you had, you'd still have lived in fear.

It's all about the effect on your mental and physical health of CEL infesting that site: the knock on effect (fear of getting more PCNs on every visit when stressed) that caused you such anguish that it made you ill and drove you to the extreme step of leaving your longterm GP's care.

Leaving your care provider solely due to the very presence of CEL and the daily threat of a repeat of all this, demonstrates causation: extreme anxiety and that step snd interruption of your care pathway is not related to the PCN per se, as leaving that surgery made no difference to this charge.

The CC is a remedy for the harassment and fear that wore you down and drove you away from a place where vulnerable patients are entitled to feel safe. Say that in your CC and add in the 'thin skull rule' and Vento Bands.

State 'plus court costs and 8% interest from the date of the PCN' at the end of the CC where you need to say 'AND THE PART 20 COUNTERCLAIMANT CLAIMS £1500 plus...'

A £1500 CC will send a shot across the bows of CEL's new legal chap. I think they'll make you offers.

James_Poisson

@James_Poisson THEY stated they offered a £20 reduction as THEY qualified the situation as a major keying error offer in their letter
when in fact they might have had the data that it was only a minor
keying error which means the PCN should have been cancelled. Why should I
pay a nuisance payment demand as an authorised user of a free car park?
I hope you bothered reading the full thread before making that sort of
comment, it isn't helpful.

OK fair enough I get it, but I am on your side why you are berating me for pointing out that these devious halfwits will twist everything in their favour I don't know, and yes I have read the whole thread, there is a lot of it. But if you think they will be a push over I would think again and I was trying to be helpful by pointing out the pitfalls they will introduce from what I have seen being on here for 14 years!

However, to clarify you said "I forgot to enter my reg when I parked" to them that will be evidenced as a major keying error which you admitted to. But as I said before I hope you succeed against these greedy dimwits, I never suggested you should pay them anything I know exactly what their game is, but if you don't want their devious antics pointing out and my observations are seen as unhelpful, I'll bow out.