Not inside the lines

still_savin

I've recently received an invoice from UKPC demanding a ransom for parking over the lines in a free car park. It includes a photo showing that the driver was indeed over the line alongside their bay, which was apparently because the car in the bay alongside was similarly parked and so the driver of my car had to park slightly over the line to clear their doors. Obviously that car had disappeared prior to UKPC taking their pics, which made me think - are car parks that devious that they would use their own vehicles to entrap drivers into doing this, and then quickly move them and send fines? Or am I overthinking it? 
Anyway, the driver has already sent a complaint email into the store they used during the visit, so what do I do next please? I honestly tried to go through the Newbies post but I'll admit I got a bit lost in there. No need for photos of ticket or times or whatever - the driver DID park over the line, and the photo shows that clearly

DE_612183

If it's a free car park, then there is no contract, and without a contract there is no loss, and without loss there is no claim.

I think the advice here is to appeal ( but not as the driver ) - I think someone will be along shortly with the exact words you need to send in the appeal.

The_Slithy_Tove

DE_612183 said:

If it's a free car park, then there is no contract, and without a contract there is no loss, and without loss there is no claim.

I think you'll find, not least from ParkingEye vs Beavis, that there is a contract even in a "free" car park.

DE_612183 said:

I think the advice here is to appeal ( but not as the driver ) - I think someone will be along shortly with the exact words you need to send in the appeal.

And the exact wording of the appeal can be found in the Newbies thread.

DE_612183

The_Slithy_Tove said:

DE_612183 said:

If it's a free car park, then there is no contract, and without a contract there is no loss, and without loss there is no claim.

I think you'll find, not least from ParkingEye vs Beavis, that there is a contract even in a "free" car park.

DE_612183 said:

I think the advice here is to appeal ( but not as the driver ) - I think someone will be along shortly with the exact words you need to send in the appeal.

And the exact wording of the appeal can be found in the Newbies thread.

I stand corrected - thank you Sir!

still_savin

The_Slithy_Tove said:

DE_612183 said:

If it's a free car park, then there is no contract, and without a contract there is no loss, and without loss there is no claim.

I think you'll find, not least from ParkingEye vs Beavis, that there is a contract even in a "free" car park.

DE_612183 said:

I think the advice here is to appeal ( but not as the driver ) - I think someone will be along shortly with the exact words you need to send in the appeal.

And the exact wording of the appeal can be found in the Newbies thread.

I have read the Newbies thread, a couple of times. I no longer know what my name is - I've never seen a more complicated document in my life! I genuinely don't know what part of that massive chunk of info, some of it underlined, some of it bold, some of it blue, some of it red, some of it linked to another page which seems to say the same as the first page, some of it linked to another page which actually links back to that page, I can't see what it is I should do now. 

Coupon-mad

I have read the Newbies thread, a couple of times. I no longer know what my name is - I've never seen a more complicated document in my life!

Seriously? You've never worked in the sort of admin roles I did! The NEWBIES thread has to have colour so that it's not a wall of text, and has to be detailed to cover all stages.

You simply use the one-size-fits all appeal. There's only one. It's in blue which makes it easier to signpost people to it.

still_savin

Yes, seriously! Perhaps it's a case that it is perfectly transparent to the author but is intimidating to the uninitiated and actually serves to worry those, like me, for whom this is as clear as mud, and ends up doing the opposite of your very laudable aim of helping us. I'm humble enough to admit I might just not be grasping the concept, though.

Anyway, I did get as far as the blue text
Re PCN number:

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner.

I just couldn't see if that applied to me or not - there's not PDT machine or overstay or anything in my case, as the car was parked over the lines. In that scenario, I couldn't see whether the driver could still avoid the penalty charge or not. I very much apologise for not understanding the info you all have so painstakingly set out for our guidance, and I very much thank you for doing it even if it doesn't help in my circumstance!

Gr1pr

There is no penalty charge,  there is no fine either,  just an invoice,  a private parking charge notice,  PCN

Adapt the template if you want,  removing those parts that you think don't apply 

It definitely does help in most case,  mainly because not about individual circumstances,  it's just to engage with the claimant 

The appeal will be rejected,  so its not designed to get a cancellation,  plan A is 

still_savin

Thank you for the reply. I propose to send the amended text below then. As said above, the driver has already contacted the store used (the car park serves multiple stores around it) and left a complaint.  

Re PCN number: XXXX

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

Note that the photograph you have provided of your sign thus far is entirely unreadable. 
kind regards
Registered Keeper

Would it be worth including something even at this point along the lines of "you have suffered no loss in a free to use car park with lots of other empty spaces around the vehicle and so your claim is instead a 'fine' which is unenforceable"? Or is there no point in trying to reason, since they pretty much auto-deny all appeals anyway? Again, a genuine thanks to all who have aided. 

Coupon-mad

That's fine as long as the real name & address of the keeper is given, of course!

Le_Kirk

I wouldn't finish with the salutation "kind regards" but "yours faithfully"