PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

[danmage1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

CPM replied to the appeal as below. I'm not really sure what I should write back to them!
Standard Appeal


My Intent To Appeal

You registered the intent to appeal on 30/03/2016 -------.
You reported that you were the registered keeper but is not prepared to state who was driving at the time the parking charge was issued.

You reported that you are being held liable for the parking charge.

Operator's Prima Facie Case

The operator made their Prima Facie Case on 06/04/2016 --------.

The Operator Reported That...

The appellant was the keeper.
The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA..
A manual ticket was placed on the vehicle.
The ticket was issued on 09/01/2016.
The charge is based in Contract.

The Operator Made The Following Comments...

The appellant has parked without clearly displaying a valid UK CPM parking permit. The appellant has parked within clear view of our sign. Signage states "A valid UK CPM permit must be clearly displayed in the front windscreen at all times" By the appellant parking at the restricted area, they have contractually agreed to pay the parking charge notice.
Appeal

The Operator has provided the evidence above which he says proves that you are, on the face of it, responsible for the parking charge in question.

You now have TWO options:

1) SUBMIT YOUR APPEAL - You can respond to the evidence by making any representations that you consider to be relevant as to the lawfulness of the charge any by uploading any photographs or other evidence that you may have. Once you submit your appeal you will not have the ability to add to or amend your submission. You have until 19/04/2016 23:59 to submit your appeal if this is the route you wish to take.

- OR -

2) REFER THE CASE STRAIGHT TO ARBITRATION - If you consider that the information provided is not capable of showing that you are , on the face of it, responsible for the parking charge, then you may choose this option. WARNING, the Adjudicator will assess ONLY the evidence provided by the operator and NOTHING MORE. You will not have the opportunity of making representations and the Adjudicator will decide, on the balance of probabilities, whether you are liable for the parking charge.

[mystery1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

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.








Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle
















4(1)The creditor has the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.
(2)The right under this paragraph applies only if—
(a)the conditions specified in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 and 12 (so far as applicable) are met ....





6(1)The second condition is that the creditor (or a person acting for or on behalf of the creditor)—


(a)has given a notice to driver in accordance with paragraph 7, followed by a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 8;


7(1)A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to driver 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 driver of the requirement to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and describe those charges, the circumstances in which the requirement arose (including the means by which it was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made those charges payable;


(c)inform the driver that the parking charges relating to the specified period of parking have not been paid in full and specify the total amount of the unpaid parking charges relating to that period, as at a time which is—


(i)specified in the notice; and


(ii)no later than the time specified under paragraph (f);


(d)inform the driver of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available;


(e)identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment may be made;


(f)specify the time when the notice is given and the date.


(3)The notice must relate only to a single period of parking specified under sub-paragraph (2)(a) (but this does not prevent the giving of separate notices each specifying different parts of a single period of parking).


(4)The notice must be given—


(a)before the vehicle is removed from the relevant land after the end of the period of parking to which the notice relates, and


(b)while the vehicle is stationary,
by affixing it to the vehicle or by handing it to a person appearing to be in charge of the vehicle.
(5)In sub-paragraph (2)(d) the reference to arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints includes—


(a)any procedures offered by the creditor for dealing informally with representations by the driver about the notice or any matter contained in it; and


(b)any arrangements under which disputes or complaints (however described) may be referred by the driver to independent adjudication or arbitration.




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);


(d)if the unpaid parking charges specified in that notice to driver as required by paragraph 7(2)(c) have been paid in part, specify the amount that remains unpaid, as at a time which is—


(i)specified in the notice to keeper, and


(ii)no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post or, as the case may be, handed to or left at a current address for service for the keeper (see sub-paragraph (4));


(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—


(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or


(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;


(f)warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—


(i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges (as specified under paragraph (c) or (d)) has not been paid in full, and


(ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,


the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;
(g)inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available;


(h)identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made;


(i)specify the date on which the notice is sent (if it is sent by post) or given (in any other case).


(3)The notice must relate only to a single period of parking specified under sub-paragraph (2)(a) (but this does not prevent the giving of separate notices which each specify different parts of a single period of parking).


(4)The notice must be given by—


(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or


(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.


(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given.


(6)A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales.


(7)When the notice is given it must be accompanied by any evidence prescribed under paragraph 10.


(8)In sub-paragraph (2)(g) the reference to arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints includes—


(a)any procedures offered by the creditor for dealing informally with representations by the keeper about the notice or any matter contained in it; and


(b)any arrangements under which disputes or complaints (however described) may be referred by the keeper to independent adjudication or arbitration.




The notice to keeper does not contain the information required. It does not specify the land as there are many "Mckenzie courts" in the UK not least in Maidstone, Birmingham and Newbury as a quick google search will confirm. Paragraph 8 (2) (a) requires relevant land to be specified.

The notice to keeper does not contain a period of parking but merely a time issued. The time issued is a requirement under 8 (2) (c) but there is no specified period of parking as required by 8 (2) (a).

The warning required by 8 (2) f is incorrect. The warning must state that the time begins when the notice is given which is defined as the 2nd working day after posting. However the notice merely states "if within 28 days" and makes no allowance for delivery as required.

The notice to keeper is invalid and there can be no keeper liabilty under PoFA which the operator states they rely on and thus the appeal should be allowed as there is no evidence of the drivers identity.

M1

[danmage1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

Submitted the basis of appeal, as a PDF because of course they had to make it impossible to write/paste into the appeal text box. Thanks again M1. I'll let you know what they say.

[danmage1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

Not good news...


Appeal Outcome: Dismissed

The Adjudicators comments are as follows:

"The Operator has provided evidence of the signs at the site which make it clear that any driver parking without clearly displaying a valid permit in the windscreen will be issued with the parking charge. The Operator has provided photographic evidence to show the Appellant’s vehicle parked on land they manage in close proximity to a sign advertising the terms and without a permit displayed. I am therefore satisfied there is a prima facie case that the charge is lawful.

The Appellant claims they were not the driver but the registered keeper. For whatever reason the Operator has sought to claim the unpaid parking charges from the Appellant as keeper rather than driver; therefore they are unable to rely on Eliot v Loake and must comply with the requirements of POFA as stated by the Appellant. The Appellant claims the notice fails to meet the requirements of POFA. Whilst this may or may not have made the charge unlawful, without sight of the document I cannot say. Neither party has provided the notice, as the Operator has only provided a reminder letter. As the Appellant relies on the document for their appeal it is incumbent upon them to provide the same. In the absence of such evidence I must dismiss the appeal.
"

As your appeal has been dismissed, the Independent Adjudicator has found, upon the evidence provided, that the parking charge was lawfully incurred.

As this appeal has not been resolved in your favour, the IAS is unable to intervene further in this matter.

Should you continue to contest the charge then you should consider obtaining independent legal advice.

[mystery1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

Jesus fecking christ. That is utterly horrendous, even for IAS.

Ignore them unless you get a court claim. Dear oh fecking dear.

M1

[danmage1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

:/ I feel a bit hopeless now! If I get a court claim, is my appeal a strong enough defense? Not keen on having to sift through the inevitable threats and debt collecting letters and then stress myself out in court :tinysmile_cry_t: It's all extremely frustrating as I DID IN FACT have the parking permit..

[mystery1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

:/ I feel a bit hopeless now! If I get a court claim, is my appeal a strong enough defense? Not keen on having to sift through the inevitable threats and debt collecting letters and then stress myself out in court :tinysmile_cry_t: It's all extremely frustrating as I DID IN FACT have the parking permit..

Just file anything that isn't a court claim or proper letter before action.

You could try the landowner to get it cancelled too.

The only other option is to pay, which personally i wouldn't want to do.

M1

[thfc]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

You can also view the Money Saving Expert and Pepipoo forums where there are hundreds of cases like this, lots of additional advice and learn about the IPC/IAS. Once you have read that you will realize you were never going to win the IAS appeal. Check out the Parking Pranksters blog also.
Next up is letters from DRP and Gladstones as you will see from the forums mentioned above who will also tell you when you need to next act (basically if you know you are going to the small claims court) anytime in the next 6 years.

In the meantime check the AST/lease again, speak to the Management Agent etc. Get your mate to complain to his landlord. Landlords wont like to think that good tenants will move out because of hassle like this so he might also complain to the MA and Freeholder (if I was him I would).

PPCs targeting residential car parks and ticketing actual residents and genuine visitors is just scandalous.

[mystery1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

You can also view the Money Saving Expert and Pepipoo forums where there are hundreds of cases like this, lots of additional advice and learn about the IPC/IAS. Once you have read that you will realize you were never going to win the IAS appeal. Check out the Parking Pranksters blog also.
Next up is letters from DRP and Gladstones as you will see from the forums mentioned above who will also tell you when you need to next act (basically if you know you are going to the small claims court) anytime in the next 6 years.

In the meantime check the AST/lease again, speak to the Management Agent etc. Get your mate to complain to his landlord. Landlords wont like to think that good tenants will move out because of hassle like this so he might also complain to the MA and Freeholder (if I was him I would).

PPCs targeting residential car parks and ticketing actual residents and genuine visitors is just scandalous.

Whilst there are many clever and useful posters on those sites (probably more so than me to be fair ) it does amuse me that they say not to appeal to IAS as you won't win whilst the widely held view is that they allow 20% of appeals.

M1

[thfc]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

[MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION] - your advice on this thread was very good and very sound. No question of that.
But the simple fact is as soon as you get ticketed by a PPC that is in the IPC/IAS then I am afraid you are in for a bit of a painful experience.
If you do a couple of searches of Companies House and look at the details for the IPC (now renamed officially) and Gladstones Solicitors (who our friend above will eventually hear from) specifically the Directors page you will see some interesting information.

The good news is that claims in Residential Car Parks seem to be getting thrown out of court regularly at the moment, with a robust defence - just google Elissa Corrigan and VCS and check out the Parking Pranksters blog. One of the Residential Cases he blogged about today was of a lady helped on MSE.

The problem here is that this case shouldn't be getting this far, the OP and his friend in reality did nothing wrong and harmed nobody.

[mystery1]

Re: PCN from CPM - Private Car Park

I know.

M1