Link parking ticket received

[Fackers]

Hi

A Ticket has been left on the car this week. The car was parked in a waste ground area where around 40 other cars also park which doesn't seem to have any form of address or name on any council plannings etc. There are no clear signs on entry of this patch or anywhere to pay for parking. On much closer inspection there is a couple of signs around 15ft high on a wall which is very vague. These are as attached.

There is a few local surrounding businesses that use this "car park" and have explained that they have a deal with the "parking guy" but non seem to confirm the name of the owner / parking operative etc. Nor does any car have any permits or tickets on their dash... Apparently the "parking guy" has a list of cars that have arranged a permit and works from that?!

I have also attached the ticket, as mentioned above there is no fixed address and the location description is vague in the ticket... (does that even count? / have any standing)?

All help is much appreciated.


ÂÂÂ*

[charitynjw]

Hi
Several points make that PCN defective, but for completeness, could you post up pics of the rest of it (Front & back).
& leave all dates & times visible

But, to give you a flavour, the relevant legislation (Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, s7(2)) has this to say

(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;

My guess ('cos you've redacted the info) is that the PCN only shows the issue time, not the period.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...dule/4/enacted

[Fackers]

Hi
Several points make that PCN defective, but for completeness, could you post up pics of the rest of it (Front & back).
& leave all dates & times visible

But, to give you a flavour, the relevant legislation (Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4, s7(2)) has this to say

(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;

My guess ('cos you've redacted the info) is that the PCN only shows the issue time, not the period.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...dule/4/enacted

Thank you for getting back to me so soon, updated full sides of the ticket.

What else is there that doesn't favour Link parking? Trespassing and issuing invoices on that land perhaps?

[charitynjw]

I can't comment about whether they have permission to issue PCNs there.
Private parking co's (PPC) usually have a contract with the landowner/managing agent.
All PPCs must allow a reasonable time aka grace period) for the driver to enter the site, read the signs & decide whether to accept the conditions displayed.
All that PCN shows is time, not a period of time, as required by legislation.

But be aware that Link belong to IPC (their Approved Operators Scheme)
& the adjudicating body is IAS
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...-kangaroo.html

[Fackers]

I can't comment about whether they have permission to issue PCNs there.
Private parking co's (PPC) usually have a contract with the landowner/managing agent.
All PPCs must allow a reasonable time aka grace period) for the driver to enter the site, read the signs & decide whether to accept the conditions displayed.
All that PCN shows is time, not a period of time, as required by legislation.

But be aware that Link belong to IPC (their Approved Operators Scheme)
& the adjudicating body is IAS
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...-kangaroo.html

I read this link earlier today... Likely hood from reading other cases associated with LINK is that they will aim to take it to court but often they have lost on technicalities and no shows.

I guess the next step is wait for the NTK and send a usual non incriminating letter back? Also is there a way to find out about their land agreement etc beforehand?

[charitynjw]

I guess the next step is wait for the NTK and send a usual non incriminating letter back? Also is there a way to find out about their land agreement etc beforehand?

The landowner etc contract is difficult to track down but it can be done.
Usually you are told that it is commercially sensitive info.
In a lot of cases a permission letter from the landowner is acceptable proof in court. (as opposed to the contract itself).

Waiting for the postal NtK will lose you the discount, but if it were me I'd fight it.anyway.

[ostell]

The sign is forbidding, it states "vehicles with a valid permit" and mokes no offer of a contract to those without a permit and no contract means no breach.

Appeal the PCN as the keeper so that it arrives on day 26 after the date of parking. Make a small change to your name and address so that it is not the same as the info on the V5 but still deliverable. Appeal on the forbidding signage, their lack of authority, anything you can think of that is missing and required by POFA paragraph 7. The idea is to get them to respond to you without issuing a Notice to Keeper or contacting the DVLA . Either failure is a POFA fail and they then cannot hold the keeper liable. The variation of the name allows you to see readily if they have contacted the DVLA. They have up till day 56 to get a valid NTK to you to be able to hold you liable. If necessary keep a letter ping pong going until day 56.

[Fackers]

The sign is forbidding, it states "vehicles with a valid permit" and mokes no offer of a contract to those without a permit and no contract means no breach.

Appeal the PCN as the keeper so that it arrives on day 26 after the date of parking. Make a small change to your name and address so that it is not the same as the info on the V5 but still deliverable. Appeal on the forbidding signage, their lack of authority, anything you can think of that is missing and required by POFA paragraph 7. The idea is to get them to respond to you without issuing a Notice to Keeper or contacting the DVLA . Either failure is a POFA fail and they then cannot hold the keeper liable. The variation of the name allows you to see readily if they have contacted the DVLA. They have up till day 56 to get a valid NTK to you to be able to hold you liable. If necessary keep a letter ping pong going until day 56.

Now received a 2nd general response letter from the PPC with the address details used in initial correspondence.... The same date a NTK was received but with the V5 name and address details on it. Please see below...

I have asked for more information and they have failed to respond accordingly...

[charitynjw]

Imho, the sign doesn't create a contract.
It forbids anyone parking without a permit.
It suggests a penalty payable....a 'no trespassing' dressed up to look like a contract

The notice to driver (windscreen ticket) does not show a period of parking, so fails PoFA 2012 Sch 4 para 7.

The postal notice to keeper also fails re period of parking [8(2)(a)], & also there is no invitation to the registered keeper to name the driver [8(2)(e)].

PoFA 2012 Sch 4 paras 7 & 8

[Fackers]

Imho, the sign doesn't create a contract.
It forbids anyone parking without a permit.
It suggests a penalty payable....a 'no trespassing' dressed up to look like a contract

The notice to driver (windscreen ticket) does not show a period of parking, so fails PoFA 2012 Sch 4 para 7.

The postal notice to keeper also fails re period of parking [8(2)(a)], & also there is no invitation to the registered keeper to name the driver [8(2)(e)].

PoFA 2012 Sch 4 paras 7 & 8

Thank you!

A response has since been received from the PPC saying “the facts are the facts that you parked in a permit parking place, the permit holders know how to obtain a permit... We have already decided to reject your appeal. They have also gone on to say that “you parked in the car park breaching the contract etc.


Should I respond back to them? And if so, what should be said?


Cheers in advance once again.

[charitynjw]

Actually, I think if it were me I would respond.

Dear XXXX

Thanks for your recent blah blah.

You have said that 'the facts are the facts, etc'

I trump that with 'the law is the law'.

You have been put on notice that your notice(s) are non compliant.

As such, you can pursue the driver (at the time of the alleged contravention).

However, you cannot enforce this alleged claim against me, the registered keeper.

Should you attempt to do so, I will bring these communications to the court's attention, & will take further advice re counterclaiming for, among other things, data breach & harassment.

I trust I will hear no further from you regarding this matter, save your written assurance that you have stopped processing my personal data & appropriately wiped it from your databases.

Yours.....

[Fackers]

Actually, I think if it were me I would respond.

Dear XXXX

Thanks for your recent blah blah.

You have said that 'the facts are the facts, etc'

I trump that with 'the law is the law'.

You have been put on notice that your notice(s) are non compliant.

As such, you can pursue the driver (at the time of the alleged contravention).

However, you cannot enforce this alleged claim against me, the registered keeper.

Should you attempt to do so, I will bring these communications to the court's attention, & will take further advice re counterclaiming for, among other things, data breach & harassment.

I trust I will hear no further from you regarding this matter, save your written assurance that you have stopped processing my personal data & appropriately wiped it from your databases.

Yours.....

Ok so there has since been a 2nd NTK letter and a general letter from the PPC to say - ““Please note, we have given you our decision regarding your numerous of appeals and we will not be corresponding with you further regarding them. We will continue to enforce the correctly issued charges.”

They still fail to provide any visual representation of the vehicle or signs despite in my previous correspondence mirroring the template above and asking for this specifically.


What should I do next, ignore all the next letters until there is a court summons?

Cheers

[charitynjw]

Ok so there has since been a 2nd NTK letter and a general letter from the PPC to say - ““Please note, we have given you our decision regarding your numerous of appeals and we will not be corresponding with you further regarding them. We will continue to enforce the correctly issued charges.”

They still fail to provide any visual representation of the vehicle or signs despite in my previous correspondence mirroring the template above and asking for this specifically.


What should I do next, ignore all the next letters until there is a court summons?

Cheers

I reckon you've done just about everything a reasonable person can do.
& should they attempt to take this to court, you have the written evidence to show the fact. (& counterclaim for a few things maybe!)

[ostell]

You could comment on the fact that the keep on saying that YOU parked the car when they have no proof of the identity of the driver. If they are claiming that this is the second time YOU have parked there then they are breaching the GDPR by keeping personal data when there is not need to.

Send the email off to the DVLA to see if they have actually got your address from them on this occasion or are purely using data they hold against your VRM

[Fackers]

You could comment on the fact that the keep on saying that YOU parked the car when they have no proof of the identity of the driver. If they are claiming that this is the second time YOU have parked there then they are breaching the GDPR by keeping personal data when there is not need to.

Send the email off to the DVLA to see if they have actually got your address from them on this occasion or are purely using data they hold against your VRM

Hi,

Following on from your previous request. They in fact did contact the DVLA after the 28 days and on separate occasions (using a request from DVLA, received a print out of each request with each date).

—

The owner seems to have received a letter from B.W Leagal with a branded envelope. (Which also includes a letter from Link to inform that the account has been passed the legal team)...

This is the letter from B.w leagal


“ WE have been instructed by Link Parking Limited in relation to an outstanding balance for Parking Charge Notice(s) (“PCN’s”) issued...

Goes on to give the usual full page nonsense of CCJ’s and court proceedings etc



1. What response should now be returned?

2. Are they allowed to merge both letters into one envelop and send together?



Cheers as always