I have previous experience of 'other' organisations who have tried to extract money from unsuspecting drivers

who have inadvertently parked in spaces surrounded by their poor signage etc.

In this example the events were as follows;

Have been a Carer for a disabled person who has legitimate access to a blue badge and can park in disabled parking bays in line with the badge T&C's.

However, the registered keeper of the vehicle passed away and I inadvertently parked in a disabled bay

but NOT displayed the badge as I was not entitled to use it.

However, upon returning to the vehicle I noticed a PCN stuck to the windscreen for not displaying a blue badge.

My thoughts are to write to them explaining the RK has passed away and invoke their appeals procedure, enclosing copy of death certificate.

Will this be admitting liability and therefore accepting the PCN

or should I just invoke the appeals procedure under the 'normal' challange route of signage/ not genuine pre-estimate of loss etc?

I would very much appreciate any advice.

theres no such thing a BB's in a private carpark.

BB's mean nothing in the law on private land.

Wait for the NTK and then just quote the BB number. They are not in a position to check and as explained, there is no such thing as a blue badge scheme for private land so it wont matter anyway. If the RK is deceased then the matter will wither on the vine anyway unless you want to pay an non-existent debt on behalf of someone who didnt accrue it because they were dead.

Never volunteer information to any of these companies, make them do the running.

If the deceased person has the same address as you then you can deal with the matter in due course.

Wait for the NTK and then just quote the BB number. They are not in a position to check and as explained, there is no such thing as a blue badge scheme for private land so it wont matter anyway. If the RK is deceased then the matter will wither on the vine anyway unless you want to pay an non-existent debt on behalf of someone who didnt accrue it because they were dead.

Never volunteer information to any of these companies, make them do the running.

If the deceased person has the same address as you then you can deal with the matter in due course.

The vehicle in question has been returned under the terms of the Motability scheme so if they were to check someone at a later date it may throw up a few problems then but I will not be divulging information to them. I have other pressing things to attend to. Thank you for your speedy response as always Ericsbrother and dx.

Wait for the NTK and then just quote the BB number. They are not in a position to check and as explained, there is no such thing as a blue badge scheme for private land so it wont matter anyway. If the RK is deceased then the matter will wither on the vine anyway unless you want to pay an non-existent debt on behalf of someone who didnt accrue it because they were dead.

Never volunteer information to any of these companies, make them do the running.

If the deceased person has the same address as you then you can deal with the matter in due course.

So, the NTK has arrived and i'd like to get clarity on the angle I take with the rejection to the PCN.

(1) To not divulge the identity of the driver

(2) To provide the BB number and not provide anything further

(3) To send copy of death certificate of keeper (which should **** them up)

or a combination of one or all of the above?

Any thoughts please?

No, just send the BB number and say that it was affixed to the vehicle as per the requirements of the Road Traffic Act. Then they should either accept this or issue a POPLA code and you will be happy to go public on the matter

No, just send the BB number and say that it was affixed to the vehicle as per the requirements of the Road Traffic Act. Then they should either accept this or issue a POPLA code and you will be happy to go public on the matter

Well I did as you suggested and sent a letter advising of the BB number together with information advising them that a disabled person does not have to be the holder of a BB in order to park in a disabled space etc and they have now written to ask for a copy of the BB or the appeal will go ahead based on the information they have.

I'm tempted to just let them get on with it and issue a POPLA number at their expense - any thoughts please?

Can a private company enforce Disabled parking bays in a supermarket etc and apply a penalty as a contractual term??

The reason i ask is that the Equality Act as to disability does not apply on private land.

Where as local Authorities have to comply under the act, A private company do not unless a specific reasonable adjustment has been made to an employee under their specific "Protected Characteristics"

Disability act is not relevant - road markings on private property are not enforceable. I would write back and say I have provided the BB number either allow the appeal or provide a POPLA code, then let POPLA kick it out when you give them the BB number. I do not believe that any PPC has the right to demand a copy of a BB.

It is an offence to use a BB that you are not entitled too. The fine at a Magistrates Court is significant... But your saving grace is BB is not valid on private land so a lucky break for you this time.

The badge must be surrendered on the death of the holder as per terms and conditions of the BB...

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/cars-and-other-vehicles/driving-and-parking/driving-and-parking-for-disabled-people/the-blue-badge-scheme/misuse-of-blue-badges/

By adding the extra information you have given them the opportunity to continue to question things wheras a short statement doesn't.

However, that doesnt make any difference to your appeal, it just gives them an excuse to drag things out when they should just give you the POPLA number.

Complain to the BPA about this abuse of process and make sure you copy the letter in with your POPLA appeal

The BB scheme does not apply to private land but companies such as supermarkets are obliged by law

and planning consent to provide parking facilities for disabled people.

Now not all disabled people are eligible for a blue badge but the Equalities Act means that the company

has to show that is has protocols to take these things into account when offering a service to customers.

That would include the use of priority parking spaces.

When the parking companies then take over the "management" of the car parks they apply their own interpretation of the paint job already there

and will dish out tickets in a way that makes them the most money as the burden of the EA will fall upon the supermarket

and not them unless you make a fuss to force their hand with regard to their equalities statement, monitoring etc.

I wouldnt bother with the parking co when it comes to blue badges but I would be sending a Statutory Questionnaire to both them and the landowner,

making it clear that they are both responsible for the discrimination that is caused by being reliant on only one method of determining disability.

The SQ to the supermarket should cause them to twist the arms of the parking co as they are published by the govt

so when you do this notify the govt office that you have sent one and make sure the wording at the beginning is correct.

Again let POPLA know that you have sent said document and say that you wish the responses to be considered as part of your evidence to them

so your appeal should be heard after the time allowed for the companies to respond.

In the meanwhile just let UKPC consider your appeal as it stands,

they only have 35 days after you submitted your request to respond with POPLA code

or they lose the right to press for keeper liability anyway.

They must be close to that so let them hang themselves.

If they are late but do provide a POPLA code appeal on various grounds but start with the lack of compliance making any claim against keeper unlawful.

It is an offence to use a BB that you are not entitled too. The fine at a Magistrates Court is significant... But your saving grace is BB is not valid on private land so a lucky break for you this time.

 

 

The badge must be surrendered on the death of the holder as per terms and conditions of the BB...

 

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/cars-and-other-vehicles/driving-and-parking/driving-and-parking-for-disabled-people/the-blue-badge-scheme/misuse-of-blue-badges/

I inadvertently parked in a disabled bay

but NOT displayed the badge as I was not entitled to use it.

I have been going through this correspondence and it appears that I have until tomorrow to appeal to POPLA.

Since #7 they (UKPC) requested a copy of BB to clarify the information provided earlier which, rightly or wrongly, I ignored as I do not believe they have any right to see such document. I think they have shot themselves in the foot by sending the keeper a letter last month providing a POPLA code, which is clearly well outside the 35 days permitted.

I must admit I have been distracted by a relative's terminal illness and not had time to deal with this matter but I think I ought to respond. "I wouldnt bother with the parking co when it comes to blue badges but I would be sending a Statutory Questionnaire to both them and the landowner,

making it clear that they are both responsible for the discrimination that is caused by being reliant on only one method of determining disability.

The SQ to the supermarket should cause them to twist the arms of the parking co as they are published by the govt

so when you do this notify the govt office that you have sent one and make sure the wording at the beginning is correct. I am not sure where I find the SQ you mention in order to follow this up. Would you kindly point me in the direction please and the points I can use to get this harrassment put to bed once and for all please?

When I appeal online to POPLA should I just advise them of the BB number or should I attach a copy of the BB?

When you appeal to POPLA you tell them that the rejection of your appeal to UKPC was out of time and thus there is no liability on your part.

You can tell POPLA that a blue badge was held at the time and this is enough to mean that there was no breach of the conditions anyway. The BB nimber is xxxxxxxxxx

As you havent done the other parts suggested it would be popintless to do them now as they will no longer be relevant to a POPLA appeal. Save that for another time should POPLA for some reason not understand that the provisions of the PoFA and tell UKPS they are too late after their mucking about.

The blue badge scheme does not work on private land. They already know this. Did any of the signs state what a disabled driver must do?

UPDATE - DECISION RECEIVED..........

The operator has provided photographic evidence of the car in the car park,

without showing a blue disabled badge while parked,

as the expectation is that the blue badge is on display.

It is noted that the appellant advises when they returned to the car that the blue badge was in the foot well of the passenger side of the car,

so the blue badge was not clearly on display.

It is noted that in the section 16.4 that the car parking operator needs to regularly check

that the disabled bays are not being used by people that have a disability.

However, from the photographs provided by the operator signage displaying the terms and conditions of the site

clearly state that only disabled badge holders may park in the disabled bays.

However, the sign states “disabled badge holders only” in disabled bay, and not that a blue badge must be displayed when parking in the disabled bay.

The appellant has provided photographic evidence that they are a disabled badge holder,

and as a result I am satisfied that they met the terms and conditions of the car park when parking in the disabled bay, as they did on this occasion.

As a result, I do not consider that this Parking Charge Notice has been issued correctly.

Albeit, UKPC were out of time, this wasn't mentioned in the decision and I think he has his section 16.4 wording inacccurate but, still another victory folks.........

They will only make their determination on one point because if the operator is wrong once then they cant claim, if they are wrong twice the previous part still rules.

Also, if they adjudicated on every point then people might realise what a confidenec trick private parking breaches are and start group actions against them when they spot a decision that covers the one they coughed up for without consideration of the true facts.

Glad you got the correct decision

Thank you for your clarification ericsbrother. Good to know you've got our backs.

Thank you for all your hard work helping people in these circumstances. I really appreciate your help.