[ParkingEye] Should I attach gym membership to complaint/appeal?

bush_hill

Hello all! Long time lurker but first time poster.

I fought my first parking charge recently thanks to this forum (airport one so was super easy to do, thanks!), but I'm a bit stuck on this new one!

Parking Charge letter issued to me by ParkingEye. They operate car park in Stevenage Swimming Centre. The land is owned by the Borough Council but is operated under lease by Everyone Active. No golden ticket I'm afraid.

Went in for a swim and presumably forgot to put in my VRN (obviously PE have not told me what my offence was). I have screenshot proof of a swimming session booked for the time that the alleged offence occurred but this has my name on it.

I'm yet to submit anything to Everyone Active/Stevenage BC/ParkingEye.

1. If the land is owned by Stevenage BC (I have not paid for the title to prove this but know that is how it works with leisure centres in other council areas) am I still allowed to appeal in the same way?

2. Can I include a screenshot of the booking confirmation? Or is that a no-no as the name on the booking confirmation and the registered keeper names match?

I'm currently drafting up a letter to send to Everyone Active through their online form (unfortunately general queries can only be done through an online form). I've found the CEO's name online and can probably take an educated guess on what his email address is, so will copy/paste into an email to him as well as the Executive Councillor responsible for leisure centres.

Coupon-mad

Appeal as admitted driver with evidence of patronage. PEye might offer to settle at £20; it's up to you and at least gives you an option to draw a line under it (I wouldn't pay it).

Le_Kirk

Apart from the good advice above, are you sure that you forgot to input your VRM or was the tablet faulty?

Car1980

Went in for a swim and presumably forgot to put in my VRN (obviously PE have not told me what my offence was)

There must be a reason. If they have given the wrong reason they are stymied - they can't change it.

Don't assume and don't admit things that my not be relevant.

Show us the letter you received.

bush_hill

Hopefully haven't redacted too much here... No reason given.

[Images redacted by Forum Team for personal information]

Gr1pr

The reason given is the 3rd paragraph on the back 

bush_hill

Gr1pr said:

The reason given is the 3rd paragraph on the back 

Thanks for the super speedy response, @Gr1pr!

So just to double check, they can legally give the reason as one of numerous? For example, there is no pay and display system in this car park, yet they have mentioned it.

Gr1pr

Its currently an unregulated industry,  so they can say that the recipient was wearing a blue coat on red coat day, or white vehicles must pay double on a monday  !

The driver agreed to the terms and conditions shown on the signs, the parking contract as advertised,  the NTK PCN letter merely states why they issued the NTK PCN letter 

The judge in court is the decider on the facts , based upon the contract,  the alleged breach and the paperwork 

Coupon-mad

bush_hill said:

Gr1pr said:

The reason given is the 3rd paragraph on the back 

Thanks for the super speedy response, @Gr1pr!

So just to double check, they can legally give the reason as one of numerous? For example, there is no pay and display system in this car park, yet they have mentioned it.

You'll never have to pay it, though.

Car1980

They have given three completely different reasons and not specified which. Obviously it fetters your right to appeal because you do not know what you are appealing.

Imagine getting an invoice from your plumber that said "fixed the bath or fitted a new sink or serviced your boiler". You'd think it was a nonsense.

The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 states the NtK must:

"c) DESCRIBE the parking charges due from the driver as at the end of that period, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay them arose (including the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of drivers) and the OTHER FACTS that made them payable"

You could simply appeal to PE stating nothing more that the PCN does not adhere to 9 (2)(c) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and therefore the Keeper is not liable.

When they refuse it you can take it to Popla and quote the same and that the unspecified reason for the charge fetters your ability to appeal because you have not been given any description or facts and that the NtK is not legally compliant in order for keeper liability to be enacted.

Coupon-mad

Yeah but arguably para 2 on the back explains it so this is a fairly pointless thing to home in on IMHO.  Doesn't win at POPLA.

Ignore. Or appeal with patronage and think about paying it at £20 if PEye offer that.

If not, come back when you get a claim, hopefully from DCB Legal.