PCN - Advice from Car Park Securites

GrannyKate

The reason I asked which hospital it is because there is a history of problems at Whiston hospital involving a private car park right next to an NHS staff car park - the private car park apparently has signs for patient and visitor parking but crucially no NHS logo on the sign. According to stuff I found on line the hospital has taken legal advice but has been told there is nothing they can do as long as there is no use of the NHS logo. If it is that car park PALS cannot help here. Last year the hospital said they were going to put a warning on their website about this.

Car parking at Whiston Hospital for Patients and Visitors​

Please note: The new car park constructed on Dragon Lane (the old Dragon pub site, adjacent to a Trust staff car park) is not managed by the Trust. This area and the yellow hatched lines leading up to the car park are owned by a private company.

If you park in this area and do not pay the fee specified, this may result in a fixed penalty being issued by this private company. The Trust has no influence over any fines or charges associated with this car park.

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82053803#Comment_82053803

No they do their own legal work which is why they are so useless

mrcheese1878

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82053864#Comment_82053864

That is the exact one. I have just came across another website with the same issue, and can see that individual had no luck with PALS or the CEO of Mersey NHS Trust.

Im unable to put the link in as I haven’t been here long enough.

Not too sure how I’d go about this now. It seems as though I have no further options.

Car1980

PALS won't help. Not even the CEO thinks he has any power. See the link:

https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/carpark-securities-pcn-overstayed-ticket-whiston-hospital-car-park-whiston/

Check the signage, especially at the entrance if you can - entrance signage issues came up in the conversation. It may not adhere to the Code of Practice, which isn't unusual for Car Park Securities.

GrannyKate

I assume it is the tarmac area above William Hill - it is hard to see the entrance and where the William Hill site ad the NHS Staff Car park begin and end - as above you need details of the signs in place. An aerial view looks like the entrance must be through the NHS staff car park which is weird unless you can get to it through William Hill's front car park .

ChirpyChicken

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82053803#Comment_82053803

No they do their own legal work which is why they are so useless

forget about this lot now unless you get a claim form etc , ignore their minnow debt recovery agency

GrannyKate

If you fiddle about with google you can get some late 2025 pictures. The sign (in blue) definitely gives the impression this is NHS parking although it doesn't say so. Assuming the first car parking you come to is NHS staff and there is a common entrance from the road - there are no signs on these pictures from 2025.

Coupon-mad

"Not too sure how I’d go about this now. It seems as though I have no further options"

No. There's a perfectly good option. Obviously you completely ignore them & any £170 threatograms, unless you move house or get a claim form.

We know what we're doing.

Car1980

Ah, I thought we were talking about the multistory.

Assuming this photo from 2025 is accurate I would appeal to the IAS stating no entrance signage, in breach of the Joint Code of Practice (Google it).

Include this ruling from Popla as evidence:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6663146/horizon-parking-charge

The parking operator issued the parking charge notice (PCN) for exceeded the maximum stay.

Assessor summary of your case

The appellant raised the following points from their grounds of appeal: • 1. The Operator Has Failed to Comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 – No Keeper Liability. • 2. No Contract Formed Due to Absence of Entrance Signage. • 3. Inadequate, Sparse, and Non-Prominent Signage Within the Site. • 4. Breach of BPA Code of Practice. • 5. No Evidence of Landowner Authority. • 6. The Case Can Be Distinguished from ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. After reviewing the parking operator’s evidence, the appellant reiterates their grounds of appeal. In support of their appeal, the appellant submitted the following: 1. 5 images of site 2. Image of sign This evidence has been considered in making my determination.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

I am allowing this appeal and will detail my reasoning below: By issuing a PCN the parking operator has implied that the terms and conditions of the private land have not been met. When an appeal is brought to POPLA, the burden of proof begins with the parking operator to demonstrate the breach they claim has occurred. I must therefore assess the terms and conditions of the site, any relevant code of practice, or legislation to determine if the PCN has been issued correctly. In this case the operator has issued the PCN for exceeded the maximum stay. • 2. No Contract Formed Due to Absence of Entrance Signage. The appellant has stated There was no clear or prominent signage at the entrance to the car park. They say this is a fundamental requirement under the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice. Drivers must be made aware upon entry that the land is managed and that terms and conditions apply. This has led me to review the evidence provided by the operator. While the operator has submitted a site map and images of the signage on site, they have not demonstrated where any entrance signage is actually located. Although I accept that the operator has produced an image of a sign stating that the site is camera-controlled and that a maximum stay applies, they have not shown where this sign is positioned within the site. Furthermore, the appellant has provided images of the site entrance to POPLA which do not show any entrance signage in place. As a result, I cannot be satisfied that the operator’s evidence is sufficient to demonstrate the presence or location of entrance signs at the site. The Private Parking Sector Single Code of Practice (The Code) sets the standards its parking operators need to comply with. Section 3.1.1 of the Single Code of Practice states that there must be an entrance sign displayed and maintained at the entrance to the site, to inform drivers whether parking is permitted subject to terms and conditions or prohibited. I am not satisfied that the operator has provided an adequate rebuttal to confirm that the PCN was issued correctly. I note the appellant has raised other issues as grounds for appeal, however, as I have decided to allow the appeal for the reason above, I did not feel they required further consideration.

The IAS can't argue against it, so considering the success rate is 4% for the motorist we would all be very interested in how they will try!

It's free and no-risk because you'd don't pay even if found against.

GrannyKate

@Car1980 - I think that picture is staff parking and the private car park is through yellow archway at the back which you can see in my picture. If the hospital own their staff car park why are they allowing a right of access across their land unless that right went with ownership of the old pub site