PCN Issued While Queuing to Exit Gridlocked Car Park

UpDownStrange

Thanks all for the responses. I will try once more to reason with the retail park management company. Would the below be an appropriate response?

"It is incorrect to state that this parking charge has “nothing to do” with the retail park. As landowner/managing agent, you have authority to intervene and instruct your parking contractor to cancel charges issued to customers. This is standard practice at retail parks, and it is incorrect to suggest otherwise.

The charge in question arose due to conditions within the car park itself, for which the operator and landowner are jointly responsible. I have explained the circumstances clearly and have video evidence available.

I am therefore asking you again to exercise your authority and instruct your parking contractor to cancel this PCN. A refusal to intervene in a case involving unavoidable congestion affecting customers presents a reputational issue for the retail park.

Please confirm whether you will take action to resolve this matter. If not, then I will need to escalate with the relevant parties, including sending the video evidence and your lack of willingness to help to the local press."

Also, I have recently discovered a slight wrinkle to this case. The initial PCN was sent to the person I bought the vehicle from (a relative), and they named me as the driver. The initial PCN was issued on December 24th. Does this weaken my case at all now that I have been named as the driver?

Gr1pr

NO, not really,  you were there, a first person Witness,  much better for you in any future Money Claim 

Umkomaas

Retail park managing agent - Cushman and Wakefield by the look of things. No knowledge on my part as to how they handle parking complaints. But if you don’t try, you (we) won’t know.  Nothing to lose. 

UpDownStrange

Umkomaas said:

Retail park managing agent - Cushman and Wakefield by the look of things. No knowledge on my part as to how they handle parking complaints. But if you don’t try, you (we) won’t know.  Nothing to lose. 

Really? Searching on Google it seems to me like it's Green & Partners, but I might be missing something. I emailed G&P yesterday and got their useless response this morning. Happy to just reply with my proposed response above if that's what's advised.

Half_way

what exactly did they say with the nothing to do with us reply? word for word

Umkomaas

UpDownStrange said:

Umkomaas said:

Retail park managing agent - Cushman and Wakefield by the look of things. No knowledge on my part as to how they handle parking complaints. But if you don’t try, you (we) won’t know.  Nothing to lose. 

Really? Searching on Google it seems to me like it's Green & Partners, but I might be missing something. I emailed G&P yesterday and got their useless response this morning. Happy to just reply with my proposed response above if that's what's advised.

I saw ‘Cushman & Wakefield’ on a Welcome board to the retail park on Google Street View - but subsequently I’ve not been able to bring it up. As I’d never heard of ‘C&W’ previously, it wasn’t a figment of my imagination. For the sake of an email, try them. 

UpDownStrange

Half_way said:

what exactly did they say with the nothing to do with us reply? word for word

Exactly as I posted in my message earlier in this thread:
"Unfortunately, this has nothing to do with us. You will to speak to the company who issued you the ticket."
(Including the typos.)

Coupon-mad

Surely the agent is stated at the entrance?

As I said before: link it for the complaint NOW, don't just say it is available:

" I have explained the circumstances clearly and have video evidence available."

prowla

UpDownStrange said:

Also, I have recently discovered a slight wrinkle to this case. The initial PCN was sent to the person I bought the vehicle from (a relative), and they named me as the driver. The initial PCN was issued on December 24th. Does this weaken my case at all now that I have been named as the driver?

Was the relative there at the time, or how can they identify you as the driver?

But regardless, the parking scammer is trying to play you; extorting money in this way for their inadequacies (failing to let you exit the car park) should be illegal.

As a bit of whimsical lateral thinking, it'd be interesting to see if a test case of false imprisonment could be made; of course the case itself should fail, because the conditions of external roads aren't the car park operator's fault, but it might also establish that drivers can't be ticketed for being prevented from exiting by those very same circumstances.

Castle

prowla said:

UpDownStrange said:

Also, I have recently discovered a slight wrinkle to this case. The initial PCN was sent to the person I bought the vehicle from (a relative), and they named me as the driver. The initial PCN was issued on December 24th. Does this weaken my case at all now that I have been named as the driver?

Was the relative there at the time, or how can they identify you as the driver?

But regardless, the parking scammer is trying to play you; extorting money in this way for their inadequacies (failing to let you exit the car park) should be illegal.

As a bit of whimsical lateral thinking, it'd be interesting to see if a test case of false imprisonment could be made; of course the case itself should fail, because the conditions of external roads aren't the car park operator's fault, but it might also establish that drivers can't be ticketed for being prevented from exiting by those very same circumstances.

"Blocking in" is illegal