Euro car parks ANPR, driving too fast for number plate to be read??

[supermancss]

I have received a letter in the post from Euro Car Parks for over staying a 3hour limit by 50 ish minutes.

 

The car park uses ANPR (supermarket car park) on the entrance slip road. I have parked there a lot and noticed that when entering there is a screen which will display the read number plate and the latest exit time (adds 3hrs to current time).

 

Some occasions the screen has read the number plate and displayed it with the latest exit time. However I have noticed if you drive ‘reasonably’ quickly through the camera it doesn’t pick up my number plate and display it or a time on the sign screens.

 

On the ‘down’ ramp into the car park there is a square speed bump which you can drive over easily but seems it has been placed to slow you down for the camera.

 

My query is, is this a known fault of cheap ANPR systems that struggle to read number plates if driven ‘quickly’ through? Police ones would easily get it but these are probably rubbish digital cameras with poor software in comparison…

 

I’m going to appeal and state I use the car park regularly throughout the day and state the cameras do not pick up my number plate due to driving past too quickly.

 

When I say drive quickly I mean around 20mph but its just as you come off a roundabout, I have a fairly quick car which can poke over 20mph easily in a second or so..

 

I’ll read the stickied posts about writing the appeal etc but not seen anything about questioning the ability of anpr cameras to accurately record number plates due to speed of the car.

[Dublindel]

Well it does work because they wrote to you

[armadillo71]

Why do you think council car parks are not allowed to use ANPR?

 

Have a read here;

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/how-parking-operators-use-anpr.html

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/parkingeye-lose-at-popla-anpr.html

 

The way you are going to appeal this charge will fail though....

 

Any appeal must be sent by and as the RK without identifying the driver. There are many hoops that a PPC must jump through to enable keeper liability under schedule 4 of the POFA 2012. Most PPCs cannot do this as they are stupid.

 

I can't recall if euro car parks even try to use the POFA so if you can post up a redacted copy of the NTK it would be helpful.

 

The first appeal will fail or be ignored but ultimately the charge will get cancelled at the second stage, POPLA.

 

What was the date of the event and when did the NTK hit your doormat please?

[supermancss]

Well it does work because they wrote to you

 

As said, I've used it multiple times. This is why I have been able to work out driving quickly through doesnt register the number plate on the screen advising of your latest exit time. On this occasion, I believe it DID pickup my number plate. However It was nearly a month ago and I could well have been in and out several times meaning the whole stay was in several parts and not th e whole length of time they said.

 

Why do you think council car parks are not allowed to use ANPR?

 

Have a read here;

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/how-parking-operators-use-anpr.html

 

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/parkingeye-lose-at-popla-anpr.html

 

The way you are going to appeal this charge will fail though....

 

Any appeal must be sent by and as the RK without identifying the driver. There are many hoops that a PPC must jump through to enable keeper liability under schedule 4 of the POFA 2012. Most PPCs cannot do this as they are stupid.

 

I can't recall if euro car parks even try to use the POFA so if you can post up a redacted copy of the NTK it would be helpful.

 

The first appeal will fail or be ignored but ultimately the charge will get cancelled at the second stage, POPLA.

 

What was the date of the event and when did the NTK hit your doormat please?

 

 

I'll post up later today, cant remember dates exactly. Will get more details shortly. I've not responded to anything as of yet. May go down usual route of signage etc, then keep the fact the screen doesnt pickup my vehicle for a later date or until someone can advise of best course of action.

 

Thanks all.

[silverfox1961]

Just a little basic info on ECP. They took the vast amount of 3 cases to court in 2014 and the huge amount of zero cases in 2015. This suggests to me that they know they are on a loser with anyone who has the cojones to take them on and rely on the gullible for their income.

 

I will have a look at their accounts soon to see if they are still making a profit.

[supermancss]

The only change is that the ParkingEye vs Beavis has appeared in November 2015 on which I believe alot of cases can't argue that point anymore; being a free car park, no loss was there because it was free in the first place. Seems that people are expected to be fined and then pay it to pay for the car park monitoring on behalf of everyone!

 

Generally in the past I have had some tickets placed on the car and ignored them as they had no details of the owner etc, seems different with ANPR and getting details from DVLA - this is the first time ive come across a parking invoice for ANPR and by post!

 

Interesting to note on the court cases mind! I don't suspect they will suddenly increase court cases based on the Beavis case law.. too much money and work if they can continue as they were!

[ericsbrother]

Lets go back to square 1, when was the parking event and when did you get the NTK through the post. Keeper liabilty only exists because of the PoFA and the parking co's have to act in a certain time scale to claim that liability. As it is ANPR then they have to rely on the keeper liability so they must obey the rules.

reiterate, when was the date of the event and what date did you get the letter?

[supermancss]

Let’s go back to square 1, when was the parking event and when did you get the NTK through the post. Keeper liability only exists because of the PoFA and the parking co's have to act in a certain time scale to claim that liability. As it is ANPR then they have to rely on the keeper liability so they must obey the rules.

reiterate, when was the date of the event and what date did you get the letter?

 

Date of alleged parking 'offence': 24/2/16

Date of issue: 24/2/16

Letter date: 1/3/16

 

"on the 24/02/2016 you were the registered keeper of the vehicle: XXXXXX

Or you have been named by the registered keeper was the driver at the time of a breach of terms and conditions of parking.

 

2 pictures of my number plate saying entry times and exit with pic of number plate on each,

 

"we are using cameras to capture images of vehicles entering and leaving the car park and to calculate their length of stay. Further to this we have signs that clearly show the 180 minute parking period together with the parking terms and conditions.

 

This parking charge notice XXXX has been issued because your vehicle exceeded the maximum parking time permitted at XXXX by 57minutes.

 

If after 28days beginning with the day after that on which this notice is given, the parking charge notice has not been paid in full, and we have not been made aware of the name and a current address for service of the driver, under schedule 4 of the protection of freedoms act 2012 ('the act') we do have the right, subject to the requirements of the act, to recover from the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time it was parked so much that amount remains unpaid. Failure to pay the outstanding balance or provide a serviceable address for the driver may result in you incurring additional charges from civil action being taken against you.

 

If you are a vehicle-hire firm and the vehicle was hired out at the time the parking took place, please let us know and provide is with a copy of the hire agreement and a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire please not that we may have the right to recover unpaid parking charges from you.

[ericsbrother]

minor point but ask yourself how they can issue a demand before the date of the breach. The earliest the date of issue can be is the 25th feb so they arent telling the truth and hoping that if you get it late then they have the proof the law is on their side.

However, if this is the sum of what the demand says then it is not compliant with the PoFA for keeper liability. It would be interesting to see the signage they refer to so we can comment on whether it is a contract or not, many arent.

You have a couple of weeks to take a piccy and post it up and then get your appeal in to them so suggest you do that. ECP often just go quiet when you challenge them with something meaningful, saves them the expense of writing back I suppose.

[Dorchester]

I don't know if this information may help you supermancss, but when my son-in-law overstayed in a ECP monitored car park last July, he asked me to look into the legality of the extortionate sum that they were attempting to extract from him.

 

On the rear of the PCN that he had received, were listed the various accepted methods of paying their 'speculative invoice'. Some of these attracted additional charges, e.g. an extra £1.50 for paying on line and an extra £2.50 for paying by cheque. None of these additional charges were shown on any of the signs displayed in the car park in question.

 

I therefore drafted a letter for him to send to ECP, the main points of which are listed below:-

The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The law covers this situation adequately with the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 which clearly provides under group 5 para 1(e) that "Terms may be unfair if they have the object or effect requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionate high sum in compensation”.

This means that Euro Car Parks

can only charge a sum which accurately reflects the loss of income suffered arising from that breach.

Insofar as my vehicle exited the car park 15 minutes late, the additional charge, if any, should be the cost of a 15 minute ticket. As there were several other parking spaces available in the car park during the entire period that my vehicle was there, it could equally be contended at Law that no actual loss whatsoever was suffered.

Your stated Payment Options contain unlawful financial demands.

The additional charges that you levy (£1.50 for payment online and £2.50 for paying by cheque) are not clearly stated on the signage in the car park; they are only shown on the rear of the PCN. This constitutes an unconscionable post-contract act, thus rendering the formation of any contract that may have been made with your company null and void and thus unenforceable in Law.

 

 

N.b. - ECP may have altered their signage, or alternatively removed the additional charges since last July, so check the latest situation before considering the above.

 

Needless to say, since sending the letter, nothing has been heard from ECP. I hope that the above may help.

[supermancss]

I don't know if this information may help you supermancss, but when my son-in-law overstayed in a ECP monitored car park last July, he asked me to look into the legality of the extortionate sum that they were attempting to extract from him.

 

On the rear of the PCN that he had received, were listed the various accepted methods of paying their 'speculative invoice'. Some of these attracted additional charges, e.g. an extra £1.50 for paying on line and an extra £2.50 for paying by cheque. None of these additional charges were shown on any of the signs displayed in the car park in question.

 

I therefore drafted a letter for him to send to ECP, the main points of which are listed below:-

The charge is disproportionate and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The law covers this situation adequately with the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 which clearly provides under group 5 para 1(e) that "Terms may be unfair if they have the object or effect requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionate high sum in compensation”.

This means that Euro Car Parks

can only charge a sum which accurately reflects the loss of income suffered arising from that breach.

Insofar as my vehicle exited the car park 15 minutes late, the additional charge, if any, should be the cost of a 15 minute ticket. As there were several other parking spaces available in the car park during the entire period that my vehicle was there, it could equally be contended at Law that no actual loss whatsoever was suffered.

Your stated Payment Options contain unlawful financial demands.

The additional charges that you levy (£1.50 for payment online and £2.50 for paying by cheque) are not clearly stated on the signage in the car park; they are only shown on the rear of the PCN. This constitutes an unconscionable post-contract act, thus rendering the formation of any contract that may have been made with your company null and void and thus unenforceable in Law.

 

 

N.b. - ECP may have altered their signage, or alternatively removed the additional charges since last July, so check the latest situation before considering the above.

 

Needless to say, since sending the letter, nothing has been heard from ECP. I hope that the above may help.

 

Interesting, the back of the letter has the same information about payment methods etc. The parking Signs arent well positioned and where I park often I dont see a signs terms and conditions unless to turn back on myself.. I dont think thats a point I can argue as there are several signs, of course small ones. I'll try get a picture and post it up.

 

It doesn't state that ANPR is used to find overstayers and fine them mind! Just the same as what was on the letter of:

 

"we are using cameras to capture images of vehicles entering and leaving the car park and to calculate their length of stay. "

Then the other part of the letter said the 180 minutes has t&c's on the signs, i'll have to see what they say.

[supermancss]

minor point but ask yourself how they can issue a demand before the date of the breach. The earliest the date of issue can be is the 25th feb so they arent telling the truth and hoping that if you get it late then they have the proof the law is on their side.

However, if this is the sum of what the demand says then it is not compliant with the PoFA for keeper liability. It would be interesting to see the signage they refer to so we can comment on whether it is a contract or not, many arent.

You have a couple of weeks to take a piccy and post it up and then get your appeal in to them so suggest you do that. ECP often just go quiet when you challenge them with something meaningful, saves them the expense of writing back I suppose.

 

"not compliant with the PoFA for keeper liability" What part do you feel isnt compliant? As in how it was addressed and there was no indication who the fine was for?

 

I'll get a sign picture up to look in more detail for everyone to check, no doubt the standard stuff but I'll check.

 

In terms of dates, I'm assuming its the same date as its "automatic" but surely the issue date of the fine is the date of the letter? Which was over a week apart!

 

if the letter had been written on the 24th, same day as the alleged parking offence it would make a bit more sense I think!

[ericsbrother]

Many of these companies send out slap dash demands that do not tick all of the boxes to make them compliant. Read paras 5,6, 8 and 9 of the POFA and hopefully you will spot where exactly they have gone wrong. It is not your job to tell them how to do theirs when they have failed to create a keeper liabilty otherwise they might just fire off a new demand in the nick of time!

As for the sign, the exact wording is crucial, as is the size of the sign, height above the ground, font size, colour etc otherwise no contractual obligation. We dont need exact measurements but often the wording is enough to mean no contract is created so cant be breached.

[supermancss]

Many of these companies send out slap dash demands that do not tick all of the boxes to make them compliant. Read paras 5,6, 8 and 9 of the POFA and hopefully you will spot where exactly they have gone wrong. It is not your job to tell them how to do theirs when they have failed to create a keeper liabilty otherwise they might just fire off a new demand in the nick of time!

As for the sign, the exact wording is crucial, as is the size of the sign, height above the ground, font size, colour etc otherwise no contractual obligation. We dont need exact measurements but often the wording is enough to mean no contract is created so cant be breached.

 

Had very low battery on phone so couldnt take a photo when I passed earlier, it says ANPR used to record length of stay, breach of the terms and conditions will result in a £70 fine (or similar words to that description).

 

There was a large block of text at the bottom, which from about 6 foot away I couldnt even tell it was writing, i assume it was.. And it was about 7 foot in the air.. I'll get one tomorrow when I'm in the car park!

 

Might be tempted to do some investigations into how well the ANPR camera works..

[armadillo71]

As already stated, the exact wording of the signage is crucial.

 

As for schedule 4 compliance of the NTK, post it up suitably redacted and we'll have a look.

[supermancss]

Attached a photo, the sign's are dotted about the car park and round 7 foot in the air.

 

As you can see from the photo it appears small print T&C's are at the bottom of the sign, they are unreadable when you stand in front of the sign due to being very high up.

 

I couldnt read with my eyes and would need a good camera to photograph then zoom in on the text to read it...!

http://postimg.org/image/pm6ptbpo9/

[supermancss]

Date of alleged parking 'offence': 24/2/16

Date of issue: 24/2/16

Letter date: 1/3/16

 

"on the 24/02/2016 you were the registered keeper of the vehicle: XXXXXX

Or you have been named by the registered keeper was the driver at the time of a breach of terms and conditions of parking.

 

2 pictures of my number plate saying entry times and exit with pic of number plate on each,

 

"we are using cameras to capture images of vehicles entering and leaving the car park and to calculate their length of stay. Further to this we have signs that clearly show the 180 minute parking period together with the parking terms and conditions.

 

This parking charge notice XXXX has been issued because your vehicle exceeded the maximum parking time permitted at XXXX by 57minutes.

 

If after 28days beginning with the day after that on which this notice is given, the parking charge notice has not been paid in full, and we have not been made aware of the name and a current address for service of the driver, under schedule 4 of the protection of freedoms act 2012 ('the act') we do have the right, subject to the requirements of the act, to recover from the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time it was parked so much that amount remains unpaid. Failure to pay the outstanding balance or provide a serviceable address for the driver may result in you incurring additional charges from civil action being taken against you.

 

If you are a vehicle-hire firm and the vehicle was hired out at the time the parking took place, please let us know and provide is with a copy of the hire agreement and a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire please not that we may have the right to recover unpaid parking charges from you.

 

 

Had a look at some details as below possible faults to pick at :

 

 

The Notice to Keeper

 

Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Failure to comply with paragraph 6 means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver.

 

Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover, and of the dispute resolution arrangements Above paragraph typed word for word doesnt state a specific amount or a maximum amount in additional charges.

 

Identify the “creditor” who is legally entitled to recover the parking charge Nowhere was it identified who is the 'creditor' legally allowed to recover the parking charge, should this say sainsburys as the landowner??

 

If a Notice to Keeper has been issued and the PPC knows who the driver is then the PPC may have improperly obtained the registered keeper details from the DVLA. It was Address to MR *mysurname* but no first name, im assuming they are allowed the surname or should it be to "registered keeper" ??

 

Posting up a redacted copy of the letter when I get home.

[supermancss]

also reading the BPA code of practice 2012 -

 

When issuing a parking charge notice you may use

photographs as evidence that a vehicle was parked in an

unauthorised way. The photographs must refer to and

confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised. A

date and time stamp should be included on the photograph.

All photographs used for evidence should be clear and legible

and must not be retouched or digitally altered.

 

The images on the letter show my number plate with written beside the date and time of in and out times. Not sure this is ok or not..

[Dorchester]

It also states (in 34.4) of the BPA Code of Practice:-

"You must give drivers advance notice of all parking charges before they enter into the contract for parking services."

So, even if it was possible to read the exceedingly small print at the bottom of the photographed notice (which I doubt very much), unless the additional charges stated on the rear of the NTK (that they impose for paying by certain means), are listed on the signage, they are not complying with the CoP.

If the additional charges are NOT listed on the signage, but later appear on the rear of the NTK, then this constitutes an unconscionable post-contract act, thus rendering the formation of any contract that may have been made with the parking company and the vehicle driver/keeper null and void and thus unenforceable in Law.

[supermancss]

It also states (in 34.4) of the BPA Code of Practice:-

"You must give drivers advance notice of all parking charges before they enter into the contract for parking services."

So, even if it was possible to read the exceedingly small print at the bottom of the photographed notice (which I doubt very much), unless the additional charges stated on the rear of the NTK (that they impose for paying by certain means), are listed on the signage, they are not complying with the CoP.

If the additional charges are NOT listed on the signage, but later appear on the rear of the NTK, then this constitutes an unconscionable post-contract act, thus rendering the formation of any contract that may have been made with the parking company and the vehicle driver/keeper null and void and thus unenforceable in Law.

 

Good point, would this not make the additional charges invalid but the original £70 remain? As it seems fairly clear to me that the £70 has been placed sufficiently to say it applies if you overstay.

 

I've got a copy of the letter but forgot to photograph the back, this is where payment details etc are. I don't believe on the back from memory it said anything about additional charges figures...

 

[ericsbrother]

The signage is their contract and there is no charge for breaching the 3 hour limit. Why? becasue it doesnt say so. It says follow the conditions below or get clobbered but doesnt mention the overstay.

What a bunch of muppets!

along with all of the more esoteric screw ups to make the lack of liability under the PoFA they dont actually have any contract to break!

So, my suggestion is that you respond to them and say simply that there is no contractual obligation breached and they should issue a POPLA code if they want some free advice on contract law and signwriting otherwise they should drop the matter now.

[supermancss]

I think I will try an appeal, theres been lots of different parts quoted to mention. Anyone any tips on how to write it? Or is it a case of it will be refused then ensure I ask for POPLA number if they do??

 

How does the POPLA appeal work, will they take my original appeal letter as first bit of evidence or need to resubmit my information?

[JoeyJoeC]

You can write anything to Euro Car Parks, they will reject it and have to provide you with a POPLA code. Your original appeal wont be seen by POPLA, that will be a fresh new appeal where you can state the facts.

[JoeyJoeC]

Have you tried speaking to a manager at the Sainsburys? Another user on this forum recently had success by speaking to a manager at ASDA who got the ticket canceled. Worth a thought.

[supermancss]

Have you tried speaking to a manager at the Sainsburys? Another user on this forum recently had success by speaking to a manager at ASDA who got the ticket canceled. Worth a thought.

 

Not spoke to anyone at sainsburys, i'll send off the appeal today anyway and wait for the POPLA information