1 Week, 1 Retail Park, 7+ NTK's!

Yikes! So many varying opinions! Thank you so much for your support. I wish I wasn't new so I could post the link to the thread where the successful appeal was. The Link is in one of my previous posts, sorry I couldn't add a hyperlink.

My initial appeal will follow the below IPC template (Not sent yet):

Re PCN number:

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner and to my MP.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require ALL photos taken and an explanation of the allegation and your evidence, i.e.:

- If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

- If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner. If you fail to evidence the actual grace period that applies at this site or suggest that only one period applies, this will be disregarded as an attempt to mislead. In the absence of evidence, it will be reasonably taken to be a minimum of twenty minutes (ten on arrival and ten after parking time) in accordance with the official BPA article by Kelvin Reynolds about 'observation periods' on arrival being additional and separate to a 'grace period' at the end.

- in all cases, you must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date.

Formal note:
Should you later pursue this charge by way of litigation, note that service of any legal documents by email is expressly disallowed and you are not entitled to assume that the data in this dispute/appeal remains the current address for service in the future.

Yours faithfully,

_______________
I will send this 7 times (1 per PCN), so the only difference will be the PCN number on each. (Honestly doing this 7 times feels ridiculous however I completely understand if I don't play by the book, simplifying things in a way that makes perfect sense could still backfire on me)

I will also make a complaint with Lidl too. Could you guys confirm that this is the right first step?

Thanks

Hi everyone,

So I appealed 4 fines in 1 appeal email as follows:

Re PCN numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4

I dispute your 'parking charges', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner and to my MP.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCNs are a vague template, I require ALL photos taken and an explanation of the allegation and your evidence, i.e.:

- If the allegations involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner. Sending 4 PCN's without allowing the receiver adequate time to respond to one shows that this is harassment and also indicates a clear misunderstanding on either side. You have even sent two identical PCNs for 1, which adds to the likeliness of an attempt to harrass and unsettle the registered keeper and drivers.

If you fail to evidence the actual grace period that applies at this site or suggest that only one period applies, this will be disregarded as an attempt to mislead. In the absence of evidence, it will be reasonably taken to be a minimum of twenty minutes (ten on arrival and ten after parking time) in accordance with the official BPA article by Kelvin Reynolds about 'observation periods' on arrival being additional and separate to a 'grace period' at the end.

- The current photo evidence sent does not show when the vehicle is parked and this should be the only means by which the drivers are judged to be in breach according to these PCNs, having taken grace periods into consideration.

- in all cases, you must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material dates.

Formal note:
Should you later pursue these charges by way of litigation, note that service of any legal documents by email is expressly disallowed and you are not entitled to assume that the data in this dispute/appeal remains the current address for service in the future.

Yours faithfully,

_____________________________
They replied:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your letter of appeal against the Parking Charge Notice issued by us on [Date]

Having carefully considered the evidence provided by you we have decided to reject your appeal for the following reasons:

The vehicle was parked on private land that is well signed with blue & white contractual notices stating; “90 Minutes Maximum stay, No Return Within 1 Hour”, see attached.

Whilst I am unsure of the purpose of the visit to the site, as you have not stated why you were there, you are permitted to park for 90-minutes only. We are aware that this may sound harsh but, the site is extremely busy. Therefore, the landowner implemented a time restriction.

A new Law from 1st October 2012 (part of the Protection of Freedoms Act) changed liability for parking on private land from the driver of the vehicle to the vehicle’s registered keeper, unless the keeper clearly identifies who was driving the car at the time.

There are 24-contractual notices at the site that inform motorists of the contractual terms & conditions of parking at the site. These notices have been audited and approved by our Accredited Trade Association. Therefore, the signage in place is sufficient and adheres to current legislation.

Please be advised that the above vehicle registration mark was captured via the Automatic Number Plate Recognition system (ANPR) entering the parking area at 07:36:07 on the [Date] and again upon exiting at 09:18:43, as can be seen on the photographic evidence that has been provided to you. Therefore, the driver exceeded the maximum stay and the cameras automatically issued a PCN, once the 10-minute grace period had lapsed.

We are not claiming that the driver parked incorrectly and we do not hold images of the vehicle at the location, only of it entering and exiting. This is how an ANPR site works.

In summation; it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that they comply with the terms of the contract entered into when parking on private land. If they fail to do so they agree to pay the parking charge in accordance with the terms of the contract.

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and have a number of options:

1. Pay the Parking Charge Notice at the prevailing price of £60 within 14 days. Please note that after this time you will lose the chance to pay the discounted rate and the full amount of £100 will become payable.

2. If you believe this decision is incorrect, you are entitled to appeal to the Independent Appeals Service (IAS). Please be advised that if you opt for independent arbitration of your case and are unsuccessful, the full amount of £100 will become payable. In order to appeal, you will need your parking charge number, your vehicle registration and the date the charge was originally issued. Appeals must be submitted to the IAS within 21 days of the date of this letter.

3. If you choose to do nothing, we will seek to recover the monies owed to us via our debt recovery procedures and may proceed with Court action against you.

The Independent Appeals Service provides an Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme for disputes of this type. As you have complied with our internal appeals procedure you may use, and we will engage with, the IAS Standard Appeals Service providing you lodge an appeal to them within 21 days of this rejection.



How to Pay:

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PAY £60 WITHIN 14 DAYS FROM THE ISSUE OF THIS CORRESPONDENCE. CHEQUES/POSTAL ORDERS SHOULD BE CROSSED AND MADE PAYABLE TO:

The UK Parking Patrol Office Ltd and posted to:
_______________________________________________________

Couple of points from me:

- They made the assumption that the registered keeper was driving the car, which they aren't to know or assume

- They refused to acknowledge the point on harassment having sent one of the PCNs twice

- They refused to give evidence or clarify when the vehicle was parked and did not consider the grace period upon entry.

- I also don't feel the claims that the car park was "extremely busy" is justified because of the timings of the alleged contraventions (all early morning between 7am and 11am)

They sent the same email back 4 times in response to each PCN. I want to take this further as I feel I have a case and people have won appeals on similar cases. Am I justified to respond? Any thoughts on how to go about this to ensure a win?

Thanks

Thanks Ukomaas,

1. None of the Overstays exceeded 18 minutes

2. The next appeal stage would be at the IAS

3. You know what? I don't know what I would've done had they acknowledged sending duplicate NTK's but it looked like a cheap shot at trying to get more money out of me through an attempt to mislead, and would assume before doing my due diligence that there are laws against that sort of conduct.

On point 1. regarding the overstay. I've had a look at the PoFA:

8(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(a) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2)The notice must—
(a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;
(b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full;
(c)state that a notice to driver relating to the specified period of parking has been given and repeat the information in that notice as required by paragraph 7(2)(b), (c) and (f);

Parked/Parking definition: bring (a vehicle that one is driving) to a halt and leave it temporarily, typically in a car park or by the side of the road.

- Given the car park is always "busy" as they suggested in their response, the driver could have been driving around for a long time before being "parked" by definition. They've admitted to not knowing when the vehicle was parked only when it entered the site. Surely the PoFA must be considered on factual definition in which case, on what grounds could they argue the period from which the car was parked without evidence?

Lastly according to the IPC rules which they state that they operate in accordance with:

15. Grace Periods
15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so
they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
15.2 Drivers must be allowed a minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a
pre-paid or permitted period of parking has expired.

- So considering the driver(s) has entered a busy car park
- It takes a while to find a space for this reason
- The driver(s) then has to get out of the car and read the signs and consider whether or not they would like to park there
What would you consider a reasonable amount of time for this?

- Then on exit, the driver(s) is allowed a 10 minute grace period to leave the site.
- None of the overstays were more than 18 minutes
Is 8 minutes a sufficient amount of time to:
- find a parking space
- read all of the signs, terms and conditions,
- consider whether or not they'd like to park the car?

All in all, maybe i'm missing something (forgive me i'm new to this stuff after all..) but with no evidence of a period parked and no reference to a period parked on the NTK as the PoFA states there needs to be for an NTK to be considered legitimate.. from their perspective (UKPPO) how would they wriggle around these laws/rules which they state that they operate in accordance with?

Based on reading the NEWBIES thread, the only basis by which it seems it's not worth pursuing IAS appeal is because it could be time consuming and demoralising. Unless i'm missing something it doesn't suggest that i'd experience any additional financial implications or restrictions on further contest whether it be via court or an arbitrator.

With that understanding, there doesn't seem to be much difference between doing nothing and trying something - even if it is a court full of Kangaroos?

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, there was a student in this forum who had the same overpayment NTK in the same retail park and won an appeal through IAS despite being told to ignore it.

On that basis, and all things considered, I think there's no harm in having a crack at it and i'd be extremely grateful for your support in helping me to construct my appeal to put me in the best possible position to win at IAS just like the other guy.

I still can't post links yet but if you type in 'Wembley Retail Park NTK' the thread should pop up.

Thanks in advance.