** WON ** MET Parking charge notice BP Connect Stansted

[Marksol]

As the keeper of a vehicle I received a parking charge notice from MET parking. The driver parked at the BP site on 1st July and the notice was issued on the 17th July. I am aware from reading other posts that this means they are outside the 14 day limit for pursuing the keeper of the vehicle and I intend to use this as the start of the appeal.

My question is whether to also include information about the poor signage as well. The driver entered the garage after 9pm when it was getting dark and parked right in front of the shop. You can see from the attached photo that the nearest signage is off to the left and would not have been easily visible. In addition the other photo shows how small the writing is. While undoubtedly passing sings on driving in, the driver did not see any of them and therefore had no idea of a time limit.

After buying some food and drink and returning to the car, the driver saw that the plane they were meeting was now delayed and as a result they remained in this space, unaware of any restriction. They left after 53 minutes, and I as keeper am now being told there was a 30 minute free parking limit.

Below I am sharing how I intend to start the appeal and would welcome advice on whether this is enough, or if to also include information on signage, or anything else and if so what words might be best to use. I appreciate they may then reject this and I will have to appeal to POPLA.


I am the keeper of vehicle xxxxxxx and am in receipt of your Parking Charge Notice Number xxxxxxx

The Notice fails to comply with the requirements of schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the Notice within the relevant period of 14 days as required by section 9 (4). I, as the keeper, can therefore not be held liable for the actions of the driver at the time. There is no legal requirement for me to identify the driver and I will not be doing so. I do not expect to hear from you again other than to confirm that no further action will be taken against me in this matter.

I do not expect to hear from you again, other than to confirm that there will be no further action against me on this matter and my personal details have been removed from your records as you cannot possibly have any further need to retain them.


I am grateful for any and all advice. Thank you.

[ostell]

.that should do

[Marksol]

Thank you OSTELL. I have submitted the appeal and will post the outcome.

[Thatjeff]

How best to deal with a parking ticket from the ludicrously signposted Southgate (or Southgate Park) area of Stansted?

[ostell]

Thatjeff You should start your own thread so that you do not confuse somebody else's case. You have given us nothing to deal with so when you starat a thread of your own then let's see the PCN. Not on this thread though.

[Thatjeff]

How best to deal with a parking ticket from the ludicrously signposted Southgate (or Southgate Park) area of Stansted?

I’ve just noticed in an earlier response an issue of time taken before issue of a PCN. My PCN was dated 35 days after the incident, and received a further 3 days later. Before detailing specifics, does this invalidate it?

[ostell]

Did you actually read post number #5 that was directed at you.

[Thatjeff]

I thought I had.

[Marksol]

As expected (based on the cases on this site) the appeal was rejected and I am now appealing to Popla. When using their website they give four grounds for appeal and say being outside these means you are less likely to win.

I assume I should lead with the failure to meet the 14 day timeline for pursuing the keeper. Something like.

The Notice issued by MET Parking fails to comply with the requirements of schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 namely, but not limited to, failing to deliver the Notice within the relevant period of 14 days as required by section 9 (4). I, as the keeper, can therefore not be held liable for the actions of the driver at the time. There is no legal requirement for me to identify the driver and I will not be doing so and I request that on appeal you ask MET parking to stop pursing me.


My first question is does this fall within the 4 main categories they show - the only one I can see to use is - The car was not improperly parked? Otherwise I have to use other, which they say brings a lesser chance of success.

In addition to this I also want to draw attention to the poor signage which is significantly off to the left of the shop. In Met's response to my appeal they said the sign would have been visible because of the light from the shop and the reflective material they are made from. This is quite funny (if it wasn't so frustrating).

The driver of this vehicle was one of three in cars parked next to each other (a group of friends). All in front of the shop and away from the sign. None of the three cars inhabitants saw the sign or were aware they were in breach of parking regulations. Interestingly the other two cars were not even issued with penalty notices, despite all staying similar times.

My second question is to what extent I should share about the signage and the other cars and is there anything further I should be including. For those who want to see photos of the signs - they are above from when I posted at the beginning. The red circle you can see to the left is the sign and I took this full angle from google as it was 9pm at night and the car was parked towards the right and in front ot the shops.

If they wanted to manage parking, rather than collect money, surely they would have a sign in front of the shop or even in it?

Thank you far any advice.

[ostell]

Use "other"

List the 14 day failure and all the other POFA failures, giving the failure paragraph reference.

[Marksol]

Thanks Ostell - appeal submitted and I'll update when a decision is received.

[Marksol]

Yesterday we learnt that MET had withdrawn and therefore there is no penalty to pay. Thank you for your help Ostell.