IE Legal Total Parking Solutions

Preparing the APPENDIX 1 response, thus far.

I dispute the debt and any contractual agreement between Total Parking Solutions Limited and myself and therefore dispute any alleged debt owed.

I am a resident student at Swansea Bay University Campus and a Parking Permit holder. The Permit being for the use of University’s Car Parks including Swansea Bay University Campus Staff Car Park. A copy of this Permit is attached. The cost of the Parking Permit is £5 covering the period of September 2017 to September 2018.

The signage at Swansea Bay University Campus Staff Car Park is inadequate, contrary to the recommendations set out by the British Parking Association's Code of Practice (paragraph 18.2) which is necessary to inform the driver the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions for its use.

Total Parking Solutions have failed to bring notice to the driver, contrary to the recommendation set out by British Parking Associated Codes of Practice Section 19.2
“If you want to enforce a parking charge notice under the keeper liability provisions of POFA 2012 you will need to show how you brought the requirement to pay parking charges to the attention of drivers. See paragraphs 2 (2) and (3) of Schedule 4.” The signage being inadequate for a driver to see such a notice, and the car park being poorly lit at night.

The creditor is not the landowner and suffers no loss whatsoever as a result of a vehicle parking at the location in question. TPS have failed to state their authority as “the creditor” as entitled to recover unpaid parking charges as either the Land Owner or on written authority from the Land Owner for the purpose of a “relevant contract”

TPS have failed to provide evidence that they are authorized by the Land Owner to pursue outstanding parking charges.

TPS are in breach of the recommendation set out by the British parking Associations Code of Practice Section 21.5. They have failed to adhere to the Surveillance Camera Commissioner’s Code of Practice Principle 3, “There must be as much transparency in the use of a surveillance camera system as possible, including a published contact point for access to information and complaints.” There is inadequate signage in relation to the use of ANPR and nowhere is there any publication of where information or complaints can be addressed.

The creditors claim of £110 per Parking Charge Notice is in excess of the British Parking Associations Code of Practice Section 23.b “Where a Parking Charge becomes overdue and before Court Proceedings have commenced, a reasonable sum (which covers the cost of recovering debt) may be added for the debt recovery fees. This sum must not exceed £70 unless prior approval from the BPA has been granted.”

I need more documents or information
I need a copy of
1) A plan showing where Signs are displayed, and when they were placed
2) Details of the signs displayed, (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
3) Witness statements relating to each of the alleged debts
4) All PCN notices issued by TPS
5) ANPR operator procedures including manual ANPR quality check for each PCN raised.
6) All photographs relied upon in respect of the issued PCNs
7) Written authorisation of the Land Owner in accordance with the requirement set out by the British Parking Associations Code of Practice, Section 7
8) A copy of any alleged contract with the driver
9) What has been added to the Parking Charge, what that represents and how it has been calculated
10) Registered keeper Data requests to DVLA in relation to the vehicle for each alleged contravention
11) Provide a copy of the approval from British Parking Association as per Section 23.b

With regard to the Surveillance bit, whilst its an argument for dis-proportionality, not sure it makes sense as a defense..