Back in October 2015 I was visiting a friend who lives in an apartment complex in Cardiff bay area.
Usually concierge there will let you in and inform you of where to park
however when I turned up no one there to instruct
so friend buzzed me through the barrier.
All the visitor parking spaces were full and no where around building to park as double yellows on main roads.
There was however an un marked part of the road within the complex which had no obvious signs, no obstruction and no yellow lines, so my friend told me it would be fine to park here until a visitor space became available
(all residents have permit spaces that come with the flat for free).
When I came back to the car it was stamped with a parking charge notice on the windscreen.
They have charged me 60 pounds rising to 100 if not paid within the certain time period.
I wrote a letter disputing the charge explaining that there was no concierge present, no visitor parking and no obstruction caused by my car and that the cost does not reflect any loss of business or money spent on their terms.
I have today received a reply from them telling me they have rejected by appeal (no surprises there).
I would ignore this - considering all the advice given in previous threads but in their letter they wrote this paragraph which unnerves me a little:
"In the supreme court on November 4th 2015 it was agreed that BPA are legal, reasonable and fully enforceable.
They do not fall under genuine pre estimate of loss as they are designed to deter unauthorised parking.
Therefore this charge is not only valid but also fully enforceable in the highest court in the UK. More information can be found at supremecourt.uk"
The letter then gives me two options of either settling the charge at the reduced rate or appealing to POPLA but then paying 100 if that gets rejected.
I know this may all be scare mongering but when I looked up a case on supremecourt for 4th Nov 15 I did see that an appeal did get rejected.
Sorry for the long post- just handy to give all details.