Parking charge notice - delayed payment on entry

[Daniel FR]

Hello

I’m trying to find my way of fighting this unfair charge

I have received a letter of claim and don’t know how to proceed from here please help

Here it’s what happened
I took my family to the beach and there’s a parking there
with cameras on entry and exit. When I got there the parking was full cars were waiting in a queue to find a spot. So I sit and wait to clear the way to go and find one too, this car park has two places where you can park which are like 4-500 yards in between and the road inside it’s just for a car which means you need to stop let cars get in or out.
So by the time I managed to find a parking place and finally paid for the whole day with the bank card at the machine it’s been an hour. I didn’t even think this could be a problem, I was gone pay for the whole day and the signs they say to “pay upon entry”no 10 min or other time related writings.
I’ve appealed online and got rejected of course and I find it totally unfair to pay those amounts I need some help please.
I have attached the letter of claim

[ostell]

Which car park was this? There is a case where the judge opinioned that driving around waiting for parking was not parking. Here's a write up about it.

[Daniel FR]

It’s the Bovisand beach car park I’ll have a read

[Daniel FR]

My problem is what to do know how do I respond
I am going all the way don’t actually know court proceedings but yeah no matter the cost i will do it

[ostell]

If you can post up the intitial NTK you received and photos of the signs.

[Daniel FR]

I managed to find it here it is

[Daniel FR]

I don’t have pictures with the signs but I can go and take some

[Daniel FR]

Hello

That’s the response they gave me to the email I’ve sent.
I was unprepared but working on it if anyone could help with some guidance to what’s coming next will be totally appreciated

“



Response to your Disputes

1. We can confirm that your quotations of the British Parking Association (BPA) guidelines is irrelevant as this PCN was issued in line with the International Parking Community (IPC).

At the time of the contravention, the Claimant was a member of the IPC. The IPC is an Accredited Trade Association within the parking industry. As our Client was an established member of the IPC at the time of the contravention, it had to adhere to the IPC’s Code of Practice for parking on private land. This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the Car Park. The signs within the Car Park fully comply with the recommendations outlined in the Code of Practice and are therefore deemed reasonable. The signs are clearly displayed, and you would have had the opportunity to read and understand them on parking at the Car Park. An objective observer would consider this action to have been done in acceptance of the terms and conditions. The signage at the Car Park clearly incorporates the terms and conditions. For all intents and purposes, the signage is correct, and sufficient attention was brought to you with regards to the terms and conditions.

1. We note your comments, however as previously stated in Our Client’s appeal response, ‘This parking session did not start until 11:41, some 1 hour 2 minutes after your arrival into the car park. We allow a 10 minute grace period at this site which is enough time to purchase a valid ticket for parking and to return to your vehicle to display the valid ticket in windscreen or to activate a valid RingGo session, as the conditions of parking states that this is a requirement of parking.’ The grace period Our Client allows starts when you enter the car park and allows the driver 10 minutes to observe the Terms and Condtions, park and then activate their parking session through purchasing a ticket at the machine and display it, or active a valid RingGo session. As the ticket was purchased after the agreed 10 minute grace period Our Client allows, the PCN was issued.
2. Please note that we will not be providing a copy of the agreement between our Client and the landowner. The document is commercially sensitive and shall only be produced if the matter progresses to formal hearing at Court. However we can confirm that our Client holds the necessary right with the landowner to issue PCN's and take legal action to recover outstanding balances where needed. Your mention of POPLA is, again, irrelevant, as the appeals service beyond Our Client was the IAS, as advised above.
3. We note your comments regarding the disclosure of your details as the registered keeper of the Vehicle by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). Our Client’s signage alludes to the fact that they may request registered keeper’s details from the DVLA for the purpose of issuing a PCN. As an approved car parking operator, our Client is able to obtain such details from the DVLA in the event the terms and conditions of the Car Park have been breached. In any event, we refer you to the extract below taken from the DVLA Release of Information document which affirms our Client’s position above. ‘The DVLA’s vehicle database records details of the registered keeper of a vehicle, although it is acknowledge that the registered keeper may not be the driver of the vehicle at any particular point in time. Vehicle keeper details may be disclosed to law enforcement authorities or private litigants as a first point of contact to establish where liability for an incident or event may lie. Refusal to disclose these details would mean that motorists could drive or park a vehicle without fear of being held responsible for their actions. Disclosure in these circumstances does not breach the Data Protection Act and the Information Commissioner’s Office is fully aware that data held on the DVLA’s records is released in this way’
4. Please see attached images of the relevant signage of the car park. It states ‘Images of vehicles including registration number will be obtained to confirm entry and exit of the car park to calculate the length of stay and enforce non compliance of the terms and conditions of entry onto this land… Please see full privacy notice at www.pps.uk.comData Protection Officer dpo@pps.uk.com’. Our Client has provided sufficient information regarding privacy and data protection and directs drivers to a placed to obtain further information should they require it.
5. Our Client does intend to rely Schedule 4 of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 as the PCN was issued to yourself, on 2 June 2020, within the relevant time frame of the contravention, which occurred on 27 May 2020.
6. Please find enclosed the evidence of the Parking Charge Notice as requested. Thepassword for this folder is the Vehicle Registration for the vehicle in capital letters with no spaces. Should you have any issues opening this folder, please retry opening this document on a computer as other devices may have compatibility issues.
7. Our Client is not relying on evidence that you parked. It would appear you are seeking to rely on meritless technicalities rather than focusing on the breach of our client’s terms and conditions, which you agreed to by entering the car park and remaining on site beyond the grace period. The ANPR photographs and data from our client’s transaction log shows that –
   
   1. You entered our client’s private land;
   2. You remained within the Car Park beyond the grace period allowed; and
   3. That payment was made for your time within the car park after the grace period allowed.
8. Your comments regarding proof that your Vehicle was parked are irrelevant. Our client’s private land is for the enjoyment of motorists wishing to adhere to the terms and conditions in place.
9. We once again note that Our Client’s signage is compliant with the IPC guidelines.
10. The £100.00 charge is regarded as a charge for contravening the terms and conditions, and our Client has a legitimate interest in charging infringing motorists which extends beyond the recovery of any loss. The Supreme Court considered that PCN Charges (like this charge) in ParkingEye v Beavis [2015] EWCA Civ 402 serve a legitimate commercial interest and did not consider the term imposing a similar charge as unfair. The relevant car parking Code of Practice also gives guidance that £100.00 is a reasonable sum to charge.
    Our Client has offered to contract with you, providing a limited contractual license to use the Car Park on the basis of the specified terms and conditions. Our Client has provided their end of the bargain by permitting your Vehicle to park on private land. Following your breach, the our Client is simply enforcing the terms and conditions in relation to that breach.
11. You had the opportunity to make payment of the lower amount of £60.00 within 14 days of the PCN being issued to yourself but you did not act upon this. You were then offered the opportunity in Our Client’s appeal response to pay this discounted £60.00 and, again, this was not actioned by yourself.

As a result of the breach, Our Client is well within their contractual rights to issue the Parking Charge Notice and the full outstanding balance of £160.00 remains due and owing to ourselves.

What to do next

Our Client is willing to resolve matters with you on an amicable basis, however, this is contingent on you making immediate arrangements to repay the outstanding balance due within 14 days.

We can confirm your options for repayment are as follows:

• Payment in full as a lump sum.

• If you cannot afford to pay the outstanding balance within 14 days don't worry, Our Client may be willing to accept repayments of the outstanding balance at an affordable rate each month by agreeing a Tomlin Order.

It is important that you call us before the 14 day period expires to discuss the options available to you.”

[ostell]

Can you post up the reverse of the PCN as the front fails to invoke keeper liability

And what you wrote to them, suitably redacted.

[Daniel FR]

Hi
I just received a claim form from county court Northampton

[ostell]

And the response to post #9 ?

[Daniel FR]

I have the first page here and not being involved in any court proceedings don’t even know where to start

[Daniel FR]

What I have sent it wasn’t good but lack of time because work put me in this situation

[Daniel FR]

I’m even struggling to upload all the stuff here.
I’m continuing with the rest of the answer that I’ve sent to bwlegal

[Daniel FR]

The back of the PCN for keeper liability - I appealed to PPS and told them I was the driver