Parking Apps - Can you claim a keying error?

mczero

I parked and paid at a car park using the Ringo app. My trip was extended so that I ended up staying overnight and the following morning I went to buy another parking session whilst remote from the car park. It turns out that I inadvertently selected the next door but similarly named car park in the app. I think this constitutes a minor keying error.  A code of practise is pretty clear that keying errors should be handled sympathetically on appeal but don't address keying errors in parking apps (they seem to just deal with VRN as example)

I enquired of Ringo could re- attribute the money that I paid them from one car park to the next or car park – as they are the agent for both. They said “no” but they did refund me the money for the 2nd day.

I offered to pay the operator when I first contacted them but they didn't even acknowledge that. I have been through the various appeals processes eg IAS but as reasonably expected I just get the same templated letters back.

I'm just wondering if anybody else has had experience of making a minor error in using the Parking App as a defence?

Fruitcake

Which parking company?

Plan A is always a complaint to the landowner and your MP, and it is never too late to do so. In your MP complain, ask them when the mandatory parking code of practice is going to be introduced.

You stood a 4% chance of winning an IAS appeal which is why the forum regulars advise people not to bother with it.

Thoroughly read the sticky Announcement for NEWBIES.

Ignore debt collectors.

Do not ignore a letter of/before claim or a court claim. Come back to this thread if that happens. 

Plan A is still your best option.

mczero

Fruitcake said:

Which parking company?

Plan A is always a complaint to the landowner and your MP, and it is never too late to do so. In your MP complain, ask them when the mandatory parking code of practice is going to be introduced.

You stood a 4% chance of winning an IAS appeal which is why the forum regulars advise people not to bother with it.

Thoroughly read the sticky Announcement for NEWBIES.

Ignore debt collectors.

Do not ignore a letter of/before claim or a court claim. Come back to this thread if that happens. 

Plan A is still your best option.

Parking Company is Napier.  I have tried but seem unable to find the landowner (I thought it was SW trains but they own the adjacent and similarly named carpark).  I will write to my MP (and I copy to the MP where the Car Park is sited).  Have read the NEWBIES announcement.   

DE_612183

where is this car park?

mczero

DE_612183 said:

where is this car park?

Fareham - Station Approach (as opposed to Fareham Station).  Another post suggested that Napier own this carpark and so an appeal to the owner route won't work 

LDast

I'm pretty sure that both those car parks are on land owned or managed by the Train Operating Company (TOC) and therefore not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA as they will be under statutory control (Railway Byelaws).

If that is the case, then there is no Keeper liability and unless the Keeper blabs that they were the driver, nothing can become of it.

Coupon-mad

But you should ignore Napier until solicitor's LBC or court claim stage. They rarely litigate.

mczero

LDast said:

I'm pretty sure that both those car parks are on land owned or managed by the Train Operating Company (TOC) and therefore not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA as they will be under statutory control (Railway Byelaws).

If that is the case, then there is no Keeper liability and unless the Keeper blabs that they were the driver, nothing can become of it.

I have read somewhere else on this site that Napier own that particular site and I will ask the TOC to confirm - thanks. I paid for the parking via Ringo but the 2nd session selected the nearby and similarly named lot. I foolishly expected that they would be reasonable.    

fisherjim

It isn't a "lot" it's a car park, and a keying error relates to your VRN not a location.

Napier are ecstatic that people make these mistakes it's how they scam money out of people, nothing you say in an appeal will work, just let them huff and puff.

It says on the signage that Napier manage the car park not that they own it, and that signage is dreadful, can't even see the PCN threat.

mczero

LDast said:

I'm pretty sure that both those car parks are on land owned or managed by the Train Operating Company (TOC) and therefore not relevant land for the purposes of PoFA as they will be under statutory control (Railway Byelaws).

If that is the case, then there is no Keeper liability and unless the Keeper blabs that they were the driver, nothing can become of it.

I contacted SWT and got this message from their team 
"I can confirm we manage the car park with the RingGo code 2015 at Fareham. We can’t intervene if you have an issue with Napier Parking at another car park"
I am 99% sure that 3199 is owned by Napier. 

Coupon-mad

Do nothing. By going confidently into the 'ignore' stance, the only steps to take are:

- Tell them if you move house within 6 years.

- Ignore the tedious £160/£170 threatograms shown in pictures in the 4th post of the NEWBIES thread. Please read it.

- Come back if you get a LBC as per the 2nd post of the NEWBIES thread. 

There is no risk AT ALL in defending a court claim. No CCJ. No bailiffs.