OPS IAS appeal rejected.

ParkingMad

According to this FOI request to BHCC, Denman Place is included on the parking enforcement contract with OPS.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/parking_charge_notices_issued_by_16#incoming-3373471

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82162820#Comment_82162820

So there is no keeper liability possible.

Can we see the NTK please, both sides.

BayConfused1234

The notice to keeper

Coupon-mad

Oh yes, completely non-POFA worded.

Driver liability only because as @ParkingMad pointed out, this site is under statutory control so it is not 'relevant land' (i.e. it doesn't fall under Schedule 4 of PoFA).

BayConfused1234

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82163028#Comment_82163028

Thank you what does that mean is it likely that they will bring it to court and if so do I have to answer who was the driver?

Coupon-mad

Sorry I'm packing for holiday. I'm away!

Stop worrying about this. It means they cannot pursue you as keeper, as we already said

Car1980

The argument seems to be they were not parked but unloading and loading. The acts of loading/unloading and parking are not mutually exclusive. One must first park to load. The terms make no exception for loading or unloading. The Courts have determined that vehicles stationary on private land are parked within the meaning of the signage, irrespective of the period parked and factors such as whether the driver remains in the vehicle or the engine remains running. On the basis of the evidence provided, I am satisfied that the Appellant was parked on this occasion and his assertion to the contrary is not accepted.

Liar Level: Elite

Boris Johnson Tier.