Capital Car Park Control - PCN - Residents car park

vaders

I own a freehold property with have exclusive rights by grant only to park in a specific place.

My sister received a PCN NTK on 9th June for a contravention on 11 May. I forgot to book her in on a visitors permit. Only realising after the initial 10 minutes grace, and 30 minutes contractor grace.

I called up the operator to cancel the PCN which in turn they advised to follow procedure to appeal via the owner of the vehicle, as they would not accept an appeal by me.

The appeal:

On the day in question, I was visiting one of the four directors of the estate’s RMC. My brother, who is one of the directors, attempted to register my vehicle via the visitor portal. Unfortunately, the registration was made shortly after my arrival, due to a genuine oversight as the directors are still getting used to the new visitor permit system that was recently implemented on the estate.

This was an honest mistake, and there was no intention to breach any parking rules. I was parked with the knowledge and approval of a director of the RMC, and steps were taken to register my vehicle, albeit slightly delayed. In light of the circumstances, I kindly request that you exercise discretion and cancel this parking charge. I trust you will take into consideration the nature of this incident and the mitigating factors involved. Thank you for your time and understanding. I look forward to your response."

The appeal was unsuccessful due to the reasons below.

"We appreciate your explanation and understand the circumstances outlined in your correspondence. However, it remains the responsibility of visitors and residents to ensure that vehicles are correctly registered within the permitted grace period using the visitor portal system.

While we acknowledge your statement that the resident was unfamiliar with the new system, it is important to note that all residents were informed of the visitor permit system prior to it going live. This was to allow sufficient time for familiarisation and to help avoid such oversights.

In this case, our records show that the vehicle exceeded the grace period by 21 minutes, with a total duration of 31 minutes from the time of entry. Additionally, the vehicle was only registered in the system after it had been captured exiting the car park, which does not comply with the clearly displayed terms and conditions on site. Given these facts, we regret to inform you that we will not be cancelling the PCN. The charge has been issued correctly in line with the terms and conditions in place. To reaffirm, the parking requirements stipulate that a parking permit must be clearly displayed, or in this case be registered with us. Which in turn works as what is called a virtual permit. This enables our patrols to identify which vehicle is authorised to park in the car park.

Although you describe particular reasons within your appeal, you must ensure that your vehicle has indeed been registered with us, and a virtual permit has been issued before parking.

You may appreciate that the terms and conditions are clearly displayed around the car park area, giving transparency for all users of the parking area."

I appealed on behalf of my sister on the 3rd August with the following grounds
*I have pre existing rights.
*The operator has no authority over my space.
*No contract exists.
*No loss has been incurred.
*ANPR camera i suspect is on public land.

After reading the newbies guide, NOTK was not within the 14 days. I cannon update my POPLA appeal till the operator replies with evidence. Do iI still have that ground for appeal after admitting who the driver/registered keeper is?

I await your expert advice.

Coupon-mad

Why on earth have you agreed to a permit scheme that interferes with your exclusive grant of parking rights?

What was the RTM company thinking? You don't impose this rubbish on any residents, let alone those with an exclusive grant!

Read this case and kick out the PPC:

https://www.landmarkchambers.co.uk/news-and-cases/court-of-appeal-delivers-important-judgment-in-holland-park-dispute-as-to-parking-rights

vaders

Unfortunately as a director of the estate, I lost the vote 3v1.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6525954/rtm-private-parking-company/p1

Several residents are collectively gathering information, guidance etc to combat what is now in place.

Coupon-mad

What complete and utter idiots the others in your RTM group are. Deluded. I hope they know what they've done to people?

Any chance you can publicise the MHCLG's current Public Consultation in a short 'newsletter' or other email from you this month?

Could you say: "I am doing this Public Consultation to change the law and I encourage all victims of the unwanted parking regime to respond, too."