Hospital staff carpark

Preaching9118

Hi all - hoping for a bit of advice as I've come across all these resources a little late in the process.

Was in a rush late for an appointment at the hospital so swung into the first carpark that looked like it had a space, parked up and ran out to the appointment. After the appointment, went to the machine, keyed in the reg number, paid the amount shown on screen and then drove off. Didn't read the signs at the time as was in a rush, but google maps shows a sign that says staff parking by the entrance.

Received the invoice a couple of weeks later and as was under the impression there hadn't been an issue, submitted the appeal along the lines of "I had an appointment, I paid for the parking, here is proof of payment". Appeal was rejected as no proof of permit was provided.

Then complained to PALS along the same lines and found out that it was a staff carpark.

I have a POPLA reference so am at the stage of going to them. Is there anything that can be done here considering the above?

Car1980

What PPC? Parking Eye?

Preaching9118

Car Parking Partnership

Fruitcake

A subsidiary of ParkingEye I believe.

Complain to the head of the hospital trust/CEO, and your MP. Remind them of the government's parking principles from the link below.

NHS car parking guidance 2022 for NHS trusts and NHS foundation trusts - GOV.UK

Do this first as unregulated private parking companies will whinge that dealing with an appeal costs them money, but do not miss the PoPLA deadline if a cancellation is not forthcoming.

For the appeal, use all the points available to you from the third post of the sticky Announcement for NEWBIES.

Point 1 should be forbidding signage. There was nothing of value offered to a motorist who was not a member of staff. Without an offer, there can be no consideration, and therefore no acceptance, and therefore no contract can have ben formed, and without a contract there can have been no breach.

Get photos of the site and signage if possible (use Google Streetview images if necessary) from a (rushing) driver's point of view, especially any that are damaged, obscured, pointing the wrong way etcetera. If the driver was not aware the car park was for staff members only, then the signs must have been inadequate.

Post your draft PoPLA appeal here for checking before you submit it.

Which hospital? It may have cropped up here before.

Coupon-mad

I would NOT bother with POPLA and instead just ignore CPP, who have never sued anyone.

Sit tight. Do nothing except the below.

By going confidently into the 'ignore' stance, the only steps to take (because you MUST check every letter) are:

- Tell them if you move house within 6 years.

- Ignore the tedious £170 threatograms shown in pictures in the 4th post of the NEWBIES thread.

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

Nobody pays a penny and no hearing is even needed in most cases. Search the forum and read a few cases as they are easy to beat by waiting for a claim form - it is easier than appealing!

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

Preaching9118

Coupon-mad said:

I would NOT bother with POPLA and instead just ignore CPP, who have never sued anyone.

Sit tight. Do nothing except the below.

By going confidently into the 'ignore' stance, the only steps to take (because you MUST check every letter) are:

- Tell them if you move house within 6 years.

- Ignore the tedious £170 threatograms shown in pictures in the 4th post of the NEWBIES thread.

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

Nobody pays a penny and no hearing is even needed in most cases. Search the forum and read a few cases as they are easy to beat by waiting for a claim form - it is easier than appealing!

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

Thanks for the advice, very much appreciated. Do you think doing the POPLA be detrimental in any way? I'm happy to put the effort into pulling the case together if it means resolving sooner.

Coupon-mad

I believe POPLA is detrimental and personally, I NEVER tell friends to try it unless there's an obvious winning point. You do not have one and would lose.  Cases are winnable very easily at court stage. No risk.

Preaching9118

Coming back to this at I've been ignoring the debt collection letters for the last year or so and have now received a letter of claim from DCB Legal on behalf of Parking Eye / Car Parking Partnership.

I'm going to send the template response bank to them from post 2 but wanted to check if it's worth adding anything to it? Such as the fact that they have a payment on exit system that is supposed to charge you for the parking you've used and it accepted my payment. Or anything about signage obviously not being adequate for hospital visitors in a rush as mentioned in a post above. Or is that just unnecessary and I should just stick to the standard template?

Thanks for the help!

Gr1pr

Stick to the template response

Preaching9118

I now have a claim letter come through. Particulars of claim are the usual DCB Legal template ones for Parking Eye (word for word same as in this thread except the reg number and location: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6621302/advice-for-defence-for-overstay-at-private-car-park-gladstones)

I'm therefore intending to use the entire template defence, including the below para 3 below. Just one question… Is it worth adding any additional defence points covering detail of the situation? Or just leave it as below seeing as they haven't provided any significant detail in the POC?

"...The Defendant, has little recollection of events considering this was more than a year ago, and has little to add other than admitting that they were the registered keeper and not driver, so questions whether the Notice to Keeper was even POFA compliant.

3. With regards to the POC in question, two recent persuasive appeal judgments in Civil Enforcement Limited v Chan (Ref. E7GM9W44) and Car Park Management Service Ltd v Akande (Ref. K0DP5J30) would indicate the POC fails to comply with Civil Procedure Rule 16.4(1)(e) and Practice Direction Part 16.7.5. On the 15th August 2023, in the Chan case, HHJ Murch held: 'the particulars of the claim as filed and served did not set out the conduct which amounted to the breach in reliance upon which the claimant would be able to bring a claim for breach of contract'. The same is true in this case and the Defendant trusts that the Court should strike out the extant claim, using its powers pursuant to CPR 3.4. The second recent persuasive appeal judgment also held that typical private parking case POC (like this) fail to comply with Part 16. On the 10 May 2024, in CPMS v Akande, HHJ Evans held: 'Particulars of Claim have to set out the basic facts upon which a party relies in order to prove his or her claim'."

Le_Kirk

What is the date of issue of the N1SDT claim form; what does the POC state? You can only use Chan & Akande if the breach is not pleaded.