London Parking Solutions

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Evening,

I have today with two days left to appeal gob=ne to type up the notes you gave me but have found that the appeal section will only let me type 1000words as my appeal reply and this is more.
Can this be streamlined a little.
Bloody ridiculous system, talk about making as difficult as possible.
Thank you
Brett

[mystery1]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Save http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...acted/data.pdf and upload it then delete from "Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle" until "(b)any arrangements under which disputes or complaints (however described) may be referred by the keeper to independent adjudication or arbitration."

M1

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Thanks as always, not wishing to doubt you what so ever but is that less a 1000 words after you deleted that mid section?

[mystery1]

Re: London Parking Solutions

670 ish as i recall Libreoffice said.

M1

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Thank you again, I'll get the better half to type it up as it won't let me copy and paste it. Got to love these boys!!!

[mystery1]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Really ? Even using control v ?

M1

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Nope it will only let me type in the box and nothing else, another ploy to make it bloody difficult I suppose.
Mrs B will fast type it as its really got to go tonight.

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Sorry, just started typing this up and it's going to be over 1000 words no doubt.
It's frustrating I know only being able to type a 1000 words but I do need something a little shorter.

Sorry

[Amethyst]

Re: London Parking Solutions

673 words without the mid section xxx ( just checked on Word )

Save http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...acted/data.pdf and upload it then delete from "Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle" until "(b)any arrangements under which disputes or complaints (however described) may be referred by the keeper to independent adjudication or arbitration."

which leaves...

I, as registered keeper would like to appeal on the following grounds.

1. No contract due to signage issues.

2. No keeper liability.


1. No contract due to signage issues.

The signs do not meet the IPC code of practice.

The signage position is such that it can't be read either at all, without stopping, or in the main without stopping.

The department of transport helpfully issued the traffic signs manual. I have attached a section on the calculation on font sizes driver are expected to see on road signs.
The first observation is that drivers must be able to read signs without moving their head more than 10% from the road. This is for safety reasons. Both the Independent Parking Committee and the British Parking Association agree with this in their respective code of practices.



Reading Time


The next consideration is the number of words on the sign. DfT guidelines state that a sign should contain no more than 6 words or directions. This is the number that can be scanned safely in 4 seconds. Any more than that and the driver's eyes are off the road for too long.


Reading time R is given as 2 + N/3 seconds, where N is the number of words or directions on the sign. 2 seconds are given for the eyes to settle on the sign and start reading.


The sign contains lots of words words, including the small print at the bottom. This will take more than a slow pass to read. The sign also contains several graphics, some of which also contain words. The only possible way to read the sign would be to stop on the road, but this will be a breach of the alleged contract.




To form a contract there must be a meeting of minds. For this to take place, the driver must not only have time to read the sign, but also time to consider and digest the contract and decide whether to accept or not. In a car park, the driver can do this at their leisure; typically the operator will give 5 minutes for the driver to consider any contract and decide whether to accept or not. It is obvious that there can be no meeting of minds if the driver does not have time to read the sign, let alone have time to consider it, especially when their main focus must be on driving safely and not considering the intricacies of contract law.

The first sign is too close to the junction to be read safely.
The signs contains many times the number of words which can be read safely.
The smallest font hiding the charge can never be read safely.
The biggest font is only readable once the vehicle is too close for the driver to safely turn their head.
The signs actually tempt drivers into unsafe driving practices, by making them turn their head too far from the road, and keeping their attention off the road for too long. This is clearly an unfair term and unenforceable under consumer law.

The driver cannot contract to do something which is not allowed. No contract was ever formed.

2. Keeper liability.

The operators primia facie case states that "the operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with pofa"


The protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 allows the opportunity for parking companies liable for the actions of the driver but only if full compliance is achieved. In the case of an ANPR situation compliance with section 9 is required.









The notice to keeper is flawed.

As discussed above, there is no relevant contract.

The vehicle has not been specified as there is no make or model specified. The period of parking has not been specified, merely a time. The notice does not state that payment has not been made in full. The statutory warning is incorrect.

The notice to keeper being flawed means the operator cannot rely on Pofa as the state and with the drivers identity being unknown the charge should be cancelled.

[mystery1]

Re: London Parking Solutions

I, as registered keeper would like to appeal on the following grounds.


1. No contract due to signage issues.


2. No keeper liability.




1. No contract due to signage issues.


The signs do not meet the IPC code of practice.


The signage position is such that it can't be read either at all, without stopping, or in the main without stopping.


The department of transport helpfully issued the traffic signs manual. I have attached a section on the calculation on font sizes driver are expected to see on road signs.
The first observation is that drivers must be able to read signs without moving their head more than 10% from the road. This is for safety reasons. Both the Independent Parking Committee and the British Parking Association agree with this in their respective code of practices.






Reading Time




The next consideration is the number of words on the sign. DfT guidelines state that a sign should contain no more than 6 words or directions. This is the number that can be scanned safely in 4 seconds. Any more than that and the driver's eyes are off the road for too long.




Reading time R is given as 2 + N/3 seconds, where N is the number of words or directions on the sign. 2 seconds are given for the eyes to settle on the sign and start reading.




The sign contains lots of words words, including the small print at the bottom. This will take more than a slow pass to read. The sign also contains several graphics, some of which also contain words. The only possible way to read the sign would be to stop on the road, but this will be a breach of the alleged contract.








To form a contract there must be a meeting of minds. For this to take place, the driver must not only have time to read the sign, but also time to consider and digest the contract and decide whether to accept or not. In a car park, the driver can do this at their leisure; typically the operator will give 5 minutes for the driver to consider any contract and decide whether to accept or not. It is obvious that there can be no meeting of minds if the driver does not have time to read the sign, let alone have time to consider it, especially when their main focus must be on driving safely and not considering the intricacies of contract law.


The first sign is too close to the junction to be read safely.
The signs contains many times the number of words which can be read safely.
The smallest font hiding the charge can never be read safely.
The biggest font is only readable once the vehicle is too close for the driver to safely turn their head.
The signs actually tempt drivers into unsafe driving practices, by making them turn their head too far from the road, and keeping their attention off the road for too long. This is clearly an unfair term and unenforceable under consumer law.


The driver cannot contract to do something which is not allowed. No contract was ever formed.


2. Keeper liability.


The operators primia facie case states that "the operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with pofa"




The protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 allows the opportunity for parking companies liable for the actions of the driver but only if full compliance is achieved. In the case of an ANPR situation compliance with section 9 is required.


The notice to keeper is flawed.


As discussed above, there is no relevant contract.


The vehicle has not been specified as there is no make or model specified. The period of parking has not been specified, merely a time. The notice does not state that payment has not been made in full. The statutory warning is incorrect.


The notice to keeper being flawed means the operator cannot rely on Pofa as the state and with the drivers identity being unknown the charge should be cancelled.







My word processor says 673 words 3692 characters ?

Never having entered an appeal on there, can you not save as a pdf and write see documentxxx for appeal ?

You can on the other appeal service http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...a-process.html and nobody else has issues in the 2/3 ias appeals they copied from myself ?

M1

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

No the only way we could enter anything was type it manually and my wife tried everything.

We have done it now and thank you again for your help.

I await round 3!!!
Brett

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

M1,

I have today received notification that both the appeals have been accepted.

I can not thank you enough for all the hard work and effort you have put in to this.

I seriously would like the opportunity to if not buy you a drink, send something so you can have a drink.

Please let me know how I can do this.
Thank you so much

Brett

[Brettb]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Ok M1 I realise that staying anonymous is maybe for the best so the opportunity to get you a drink is probably impossible but who ever you are male or female I want you to know I'm very greatfull for you're help.
Thank you
Brett

[mystery1]

Re: London Parking Solutions

M1,

I have today received notification that both the appeals have been accepted.

I can not thank you enough for all the hard work and effort you have put in to this.

I seriously would like the opportunity to if not buy you a drink, send something so you can have a drink.

Please let me know how I can do this.
Thank you so much

Brett

Wow. That's unsual. Happy days

I seriously would like the opportunity to if not buy you a drink, send something so you can have a drink.

Don't worry about it i enjoy it, mostly. You could always chuck the site a couple of quid to help with servers and shit [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] and [MENTION=2]Celestine[/MENTION] would bite your hand off then steal your wallet i'm sure

M1

[Amethyst]

Re: London Parking Solutions

Wow. That's unsual. Happy days





Don't worry about it i enjoy it, mostly. You could always chuck the site a couple of quid to help with servers and shit [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] and [MENTION=2]Celestine[/MENTION] would bite your hand off then steal your wallet i'm sure

M1

Cheeky git ! xxxxxx

I enjoy it, mostly, too

[MENTION=76791]Brettb[/MENTION] if we ever have the pleasure of meeting M1 we'll buy him a drink on your behalf.