Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Daver
    • By Daver 22nd Aug 18, 10:47 AM
    • 29Posts
    • 22Thanks
    Daver
    Metrolink Care parking PCN
    • #1
    • 22nd Aug 18, 10:47 AM
    Metrolink Care parking PCN 22nd Aug 18 at 10:47 AM
    I have read the stickies relating to parking on Railway related land, I am acting for someone who left the car at a metrolink station car park, went into town and collected the car the next day only to find they had been issued a PCN for parking outside the tram operating hours issued by care parking. I have read the excellent post by stationcarparkticket2018 and the process appears to be wait until the NTK then appeal using the BPA template within 28 days, the only part I would like clarification about is whether they are now allowed by POPLA to issue codes, I understand this was suspended pending clarification on bylaws, the following statement is on POPLA's website:-

    Byelaws

    In September 2016, POPLA took the decision to adjourn all appeals relating to parking charges or penalty charges issued on land subject to byelaws. We did so after receiving challenges that we did not have a remit to determine a byelaw breach.
    We accept that only a court can determine a breach of law. However, the British Parking Association expected its approved operators to allow a free route to independent appeal on all parking ‘tickets’. Consequently, parking operators issued POPLA codes when refusing appeals against parking charges or penalties issued on land subject to byelaws and the appeals ended up with POPLA.
    We initially considered such appeals because we share the British Parking Association’s view that all motorists should have a route to a free independent appeal against a parking ‘ticket’ issued by a British Parking Association Approved Operator. We consider it right that if we find that a parking charge or penalty had not been issued correctly, we can allow the appeal and require the parking operator to cancel the charge or penalty. Nonetheless, the law around byelaws is complex and we took the decision to adjourn to ensure we were not overstepping our remit.
    Since taking the decision to adjourn, POPLA has liaised with key stakeholders to establish a way of dealing with such appeals in the best interests of all involved. Through our liaison, the Department
    for Transport agreed to produce guidance on railway byelaws. We had expected to receive guidance in the second quarter of 2017. However, the 2017 general election meant that this timetable was no longer realistic and the guidance was put on hold. Now the election has taken place, we are hopeful we will receive clarification on this issue in the coming months.
    For the time being, we remind all motorists impacted by this adjournment that the parking operator involved should not pursue payment while an appeal is ongoing with POPLA.
    Due to the lack of progress on byelaws guidance, and the building backlog of cases at POPLA, some operators began cancelling parking ‘tickets’ issued on byelaws land at the first appeal, even where they were of the view that the parking ‘ticket’ had been issued correctly.
    The British Parking Association considered the situation unsustainable because, if motorists felt they could park with impunity, it would make parking management very difficult. Therefore, the British Parking Association took the decision to remove the requirement for parking operators to signpost motorists to POPLA for parking charges or penalty charges issued under byelaws from 18
    September 2017.
    POPLA recognises the impact this might have on some motorists but we remain committed to offering all motorists the right to a free independent appeal. We will continue working with all interested parties to gain clarification on this issue as soon as practically possible.
    Further updates will be provided on our website as things develop.


    Does this mean the parking companies controlling Railway carparks have to issue a popla code if challenged or can just ignore any requests for a popla code at appeal?
    Last edited by Daver; 22-08-2018 at 10:50 AM.
Page 1
    • twhitehousescat
    • By twhitehousescat 22nd Aug 18, 11:34 AM
    • 1,934 Posts
    • 2,408 Thanks
    twhitehousescat
    • #2
    • 22nd Aug 18, 11:34 AM
    • #2
    • 22nd Aug 18, 11:34 AM
    the info above is slightly misleading

    Byelaws

    In September 2016, POPLA took the decision to adjourn all appeals relating to parking charges or penalty charges issued on land subject to byelaws. We did so after receiving challenges that we did not have a remit to determine a byelaw breach.
    Time pretending I was asleep whilst under his desk , has given me insight to this sordid world
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 22nd Aug 18, 11:45 AM
    • 37,572 Posts
    • 84,512 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    • #3
    • 22nd Aug 18, 11:45 AM
    • #3
    • 22nd Aug 18, 11:45 AM
    The motorist has a right to alternative dispute resolution in accordance with the ADR Act 2015. The fact some PPCs won't give access to ADR is irrelevant.
    It's an act of parliament.

    Just follow the appeals process by using the template from the NEWBES thread. If you get a PoPLA code, use it.
    If you don't get a code, complain to the BPA, DVLA, and your MP that you are being denied access to ADR which is yours by right for not less than one year.

    This assumes the PPC is Care Parking, not Care Park UK, who are IPC members.

    Complain to your MP anyway no matter what.
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 22-08-2018 at 11:48 AM.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • Redx
    • By Redx 22nd Aug 18, 2:16 PM
    • 19,647 Posts
    • 24,941 Thanks
    Redx
    • #4
    • 22nd Aug 18, 2:16 PM
    • #4
    • 22nd Aug 18, 2:16 PM
    all smoke and mirrors until you put your initial appeal in using the blue text template appeal (appeal as keeper , not as driver , to CARE/ANCHOR)

    if they are alleging a parking charge notice has been issued they will refuse the appeal and issue a popla code

    if they reply saying its a penalty charge notice under bylaws , then its likely that they wont issue a popla code

    the devil is in the detail, which in any case you take to POPLA regardless as long as they issue a popla code

    cross the bridges when you come to them , dont assume there are barriers in place , plus dont assume you know the outcome

    in my experience having seen dozens on here, they refuse the appeal and issue a popla code - same as APCOA (whereas INDIGO stick to the popla statement in post #1 and dont issue popla codes)

    my advice ? use the blue text appeal on the assumption its a parking charge notice and take it to popla if and when you get a popla code, based on previous popla appeals for CARE/ANCHOR in the last 12 months, you will find its all been done before
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Daver
    • By Daver 22nd Aug 18, 5:14 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    • #5
    • 22nd Aug 18, 5:14 PM
    Keeper?
    • #5
    • 22nd Aug 18, 5:14 PM
    As I am fighting this for a close family member and I am not the registered keeper then would the appeal be in their name or could it be in my name as a temporary keeper? Thanks for the clarifications, as ever this forum is a gold mine of knowledge and support.
    • Redx
    • By Redx 22nd Aug 18, 5:19 PM
    • 19,647 Posts
    • 24,941 Thanks
    Redx
    • #6
    • 22nd Aug 18, 5:19 PM
    • #6
    • 22nd Aug 18, 5:19 PM
    the appeal comes from the person named on the pcn, usually the KEEPER , even if somebody else is mentoring the steps being taken and is doing it in their name

    if it is a windscreen ticket being fought , then the KEEPER appeal is done in the keepers name on day 25 or day 26 , like the newbies FAQ says (and hope they fail to issue an NTK between day 29 and day 56))

    if its a postal notice, then its appealed within 28 days of receipt , by the person named on it , or a mentor in their name
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Daver
    • By Daver 22nd Aug 18, 7:02 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    • #7
    • 22nd Aug 18, 7:02 PM
    • #7
    • 22nd Aug 18, 7:02 PM
    Thanks RedX!
    • Daver
    • By Daver 4th Sep 18, 5:44 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    • #8
    • 4th Sep 18, 5:44 PM
    • #8
    • 4th Sep 18, 5:44 PM
    Question relating to this being Bylaws land, the ticket has the following printed on the back relating to Late payments and liability:-

    Failure to pay the parking charge notice within 28 days from the date of issue may result in the charge being passed to the registered keeper of the vehicle. Registered keeper details may be requested from the DVLA under reasonable cause criteria of recovering unpaid parking charges notices. This Parking charge notice has been lawfully issued and meets the criteria of schedule 4 of the Protection of freedoms Act 2012. Failure to make payment of this charge within the allowed periods may result in the case being passed to our Debt recovery agent and solicitors for further action which may incur further charges being made against you.

    As this is TfGM land and is under statutory control and deemed not relevant land does POFA 2012 not apply? If it doesn't then would they legally be able to obtain Keeper details as they would the be breaking the conditions set out in POFA 2012 and therefore BPA COP in doing so as they are not legally able to enforce the charge against the Keeper

    Where all the strict conditions of POFA 2102 have not been met the parking company operator has no legal right to enforce the charge against the keeper, and also has no legal right to require the keeper to name the driver. The Operator only has the option to chase the driver for payment. In practice, however, the Operator can only enforce the charge against the driver if they can find out the driver’s name and address. But provided that the keeper does not name the driver, then the parking company operator is left without a party to pursue. The operator cannot legally purse the keeper for the charge, and has no way of finding out who the driver was.

    The following are the conditions that must all be met for Keeper Liability to apply:
    1. The ticket was issued to a car in a car park in England or Wales (note that keeper liability does not apply in Scotland or Northern Ireland in any circumstances).
    2. The car park was on “relevant land”. Relevant land is defined as private land and specifically excludes the following land:
    (a) a public highway
    (b) a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority
    (c) any other land where parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control (such as airports and railway stations which are covered by byelaws).
    along with numerous other points including

    In addition to the he PCN must identifying the “creditor” who is legally entitled to recover the parking charge.....in this case would the creditor be TfGM and not Care Parking? as it is not relevant land......no mention of TfGM on the ticket!
    Last edited by Daver; 04-09-2018 at 5:48 PM.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 4th Sep 18, 5:52 PM
    • 9,889 Posts
    • 10,205 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #9
    • 4th Sep 18, 5:52 PM
    • #9
    • 4th Sep 18, 5:52 PM
    As this is TfGM land and is under statutory control and deemed not relevant land does POFA 2012 not apply? If it doesn't then would they legally be able to obtain Keeper details as they would the be breaking the conditions set out in POFA 2012 and therefore BPA COP in doing so as they are not legally able to enforce the charge against the Keeper.
    Originally posted by Daver
    They have 'reasonable cause' to ask the DVLA for the Registered Keeper's details for the simple reason of asking the keeper for the name and address of the owner or driver.
    .
    • Daver
    • By Daver 4th Sep 18, 7:51 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    Hence if the keeper refuses to name the driver they are snookered as they cannot persue the keeper as they cannot comply with Pofa and cannot enforce the ticket.....which begs the question, is it not just worth telling them this in the first instance to take a hike as the drivers name will not be divulged and ending all communication with them as they have no other recourse!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Sep 18, 7:54 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,673 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes, that is an option. You do not have to use the template appeal.

    We merely suggest a template to stop numpties blabbing about who was driving (eeek!) and because people find it easier not to DIY.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 4th Sep 18, 7:58 PM
    • 9,889 Posts
    • 10,205 Thanks
    KeithP
    Hence if the keeper refuses to name the driver they are snookered as they cannot persue the keeper as they cannot comply with Pofa and cannot enforce the ticket.....which begs the question, is it not just worth telling them this in the first instance to take a hike as the drivers name will not be divulged and ending all communication with them as they have no other recourse!
    Originally posted by Daver
    Yes, you can do that but it won't stop them pursuing the keeper.

    Have you not noticed their modus operandi?

    That is: hound people until they give up and pay.

    I imagine that the majority of those parking speculative invoices that are paid, are paid simply because the victim wants the problem to go away. Not because the PPC has done everything (or anything?) right.
    .
    • Daver
    • By Daver 4th Sep 18, 8:07 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    Obviously if they are told to do one then they don't get the additional pain / cost of having to issue a popla code so it makes sense to string it out and cause them the maximum inconvenience possible.
    • Daver
    • By Daver 4th Sep 18, 8:10 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    Yes, you can do that but it won't stop them pursuing the keeper.

    Have you not noticed their modus operandi?

    That is: hound people until they give up and pay.

    I imagine that the majority of those parking speculative invoices that are paid, are paid simply because the victim wants the problem to go away. Not because the PPC has done everything (or anything?) right.
    Originally posted by KeithP
    Yes as you say they can persue the keeper but they wont have any legal standing though, just lots of posturing and BS and a hope that the bullying panics the victim into paying up.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Sep 18, 8:11 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,673 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Whatever you send to that PPC, they will issue a POPLA code anyway.
    • Daver
    • By Daver 4th Sep 18, 8:31 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    Yes, that would appear to be their MO but even if you lose at POPLA they still cannot do anything because they have no way of knowing who the driver is and cannot enforce the charge against the keeper so it does make you wonder why they bother trying when 98% of the tickets they issue will just be paid anyway, is it really worth it for them to continue to wage war against the small minority who have armed themselves with the knowledge available to fight them from sites like this?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Sep 18, 8:38 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,673 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I agree - so do Smart Parking, Highview & CEL, who have enough sense to cancel as soon as they see the template from the NEWBIES thread, as they are (by choice) non-POFA PCN firms.

    They know they cannot beat a keeper, a bit like Benteke of *that* club.
    • Daver
    • By Daver 4th Sep 18, 8:46 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    having read numerous threads about Care Parking I very much doubt they actually even realise that they cannot rely on POFA on metrolink sites.....pretty poor business model.
    • Daver
    • By Daver 14th Oct 18, 12:12 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Daver
    Well.....some interesting information. after some research and numerous emails to TfGM I have found relating to Ashton Moss and the metrolink parking facilities....the advice on here is that Metrolink car parks fall under byelaws, well this it would appear that this may not apply to Ashton Moss as the land isn't owned by either TfGM or network Rail, it is in fact leased from Legal and General (who own the Ashton Moss retail park and the land around) so would it mean that the land will not actually be non-relevant land under POFA 2012. The laughable thing about this is that Care parking, who infest this particular car park, are worse than useless...the keeper appealed under their name but used an email address not belonging to them to send the email so Care Parking responded in the name of the email address owner not the name clearly given in the appeal document, they even stated in their rejection letter that they had obtained the name name and address of the keeper and that they would be persuing him ( the email address owner is male)....the keeper is female!
    To cut a long story short, they are relying on POFA according to the PCN that I have seen, however it is day 57 since the tickets were issued.....no NTK........how stupid can they get, lots of information on here about issuing NTk's that don't have POFA compliant wording....but to not even bother sending one shows how inept these parking monkeys are.
    On a serious note I think that any metrolink cases need investigating individually as it look like some sites are owned by network rail or TfGM, some are leased from private companies so would not actually come under bylaws and at some point it is possible that someone will fall foul of this.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 14th Oct 18, 12:33 AM
    • 9,889 Posts
    • 10,205 Thanks
    KeithP
    So who leases the car park land from L&G?

    Surely not Care Parking?

    If it is leased by TfGM or NR, and therefore covered by bylaws, then it is my understanding that it is not 'relevant land' as defined by POFA.


    According to this .. http://www.ukcarparks.info/ashton-moss-car-park-ashton-moss#sthash.BnggXNxL.dpbs it's owned by Transport for Greater Manchester.
    But I guess that could be wrong or out of date.
    Last edited by KeithP; 14-10-2018 at 1:39 AM.
    .
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,178Posts Today

6,746Users online

Martin's Twitter