Stung again - do I have any angle to fight this one?

square_coaster

Hello again everyone, thought it best to start a new thread separate from my other ticket. Context, keeper's car parked in allocated parking bay for rental accommodation. Car park managed by PPM. Permits are issued to each rental property, must be displayed in windscreen. Received a PCN as the permit was not fully visible in the windscreen. On the permit, it does state that obstructed permits will lead to enforcement action (as is the case here). The charge is the standard £100.

The photos on their portal show the partially obstructed permit, so I'm not sure how I would argue out of this one, wondering if it's worth offering to pay a reduced amount (£20) to see if they accept and move on?

Half_way

what does the rental agreement say about parking?

Car1980

"Received a PCN as the permit was not fully visible in the windscreen"

Couldn't be seen or read at all, or not perfectly positioned so they jumped on it and thought "here's an easy hundred quid"?

square_coaster

Half_way said:

what does the rental agreement say about parking?

Here is the extent of the lease content on parking:

15. Car Parking Space

15.1. To allow private vehicle(s) only to be parked at the Property in the space, garage or driveway if applicable

allocated to the Property.

15.2. To ensure that any garage, driveway, or parking space is kept free of oil and other fluids and to pay for the

removal and cleaning of any spillage caused by a vehicle belonging to the Tenant, his family, contractors or visitors;

15.3. To arrange for all vehicles belonging to the Tenant, his family, or any visitors to be removed from the Property

at the end of the Tenancy;

15.4. To ensure that no vehicles that are not in a road worthy condition are parked at the Property and that all

vehicles are fully taxed.

Additionally, the property owner who rents to myself and the keeper has had the property since 2017, with the introduction of the permits beginning in 2023.

square_coaster

Car1980 said:

"Received a PCN as the permit was not fully visible in the windscreen"

Couldn't be seen or read at all, or not perfectly positioned so they jumped on it and thought "here's an easy hundred quid"?

The top half was visible, displaying the permit number only, with the issue date, the permit's location identifier, and the holographic logo all obscured at the bottom.

Coupon-mad

square_coaster said:

Car1980 said:

"Received a PCN as the permit was not fully visible in the windscreen"

Couldn't be seen or read at all, or not perfectly positioned so they jumped on it and thought "here's an easy hundred quid"?

The top half was visible, displaying the permit number only, with the issue date, the permit's location identifier, and the holographic logo all obscured at the bottom.

Appeal and tell them to go swivel but attach a pic of your permit and asking if their self-ticketer should have gone to Specsavers. Quote your tenancy agreement and tell them the 'permit' scheme is unsolicited nonsense which interferes with the residents' leases and right to peaceful enjoyment.

Then ignore them. Do not try the IAS joke.

They know you are a resident and would never win in court. 

square_coaster

Coupon-mad said:

square_coaster said:

Car1980 said:

"Received a PCN as the permit was not fully visible in the windscreen"

Couldn't be seen or read at all, or not perfectly positioned so they jumped on it and thought "here's an easy hundred quid"?

The top half was visible, displaying the permit number only, with the issue date, the permit's location identifier, and the holographic logo all obscured at the bottom.

Appeal and tell them to go swivel but attach a pic of your permit and asking if their self-ticketer should have gone to Specsavers. Quote your tenancy agreement and tell them the 'permit' scheme is unsolicited nonsense which interfere with the residents' leases and right to peaceful enjoyment.

Then ignore them. Do not try the IAS joke.

They know you are a resident and would never win in court. 

On their portal, they've shown multiple angles where details on the permit were not visible, in their defence - hence my concern / aversion with challenging based on that. 

I will certainly be appealing based on the presence of the permit and of course the tenancy agreement details.

Coupon-mad

But you don't need a permit at all.

The entire scheme looks to us like a scam that interferes with your residential AST rights.

Be sarcastic and angry; not polite.

Car1980

"15.1. To allow private vehicle(s) only to be parked at the Property in the space, garage or driveway if applicable allocated to the Property."

Your key words are "alllocated to the property".

Your front door is also allocated to the property. You'd be pretty miffed if they tried to charge you if you didn't attach a piece of paper displaying that they grant you permission to open it.