CPP ANPR PCN - overstay MOTO Heston East - Fell asleep

[Rhino78]

Hi there,

I recently fell asleep in a services area because I was too tired to drive.

I then received a Charge Notice from the lovely people at CP Plus.

 

Below is the relevent information for my case.

Any help would be very greatly appreciated.

 

1 Date of the infringement 11/2/18

2 Date on the NTK 20/2/18

 

3 Date received: Didn't note, just screamed profanities.

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? No, it mentions the Data Protection Act.

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

 

6 Have you appealed? I sent this email to MOTO which they kindly forwarded onto the appeals email.

Good afternoon.

 

My name is ..............., I am writing to you because I recently received a charge notice from CP Plus.

 

I work in the railway and I was working at an area called Grately.

I was driving back to Leyton in London where I live when I became too tired to drive and pulled over at the services area in MOTO Heston Services.

I remember I was around 45 minutes from home at that time but I was just too tired to continue safely. I fell asleep almost straight away and woke up leaving the services area and overstaying by 32 minutes.

 

I’m just an honest working guy and felt it was dangerous to continue driving.

I’m appealing to you to please cancel this charge notice as it was an sincere mistake made in the sake of safety.

he notice reference number is ................... I can supply any other supporting information that you may require to verify my case.

 

Thanks for reading my email and considering my situation.

 

Kind regards,

........

 

7 Who is the parking company? CP Plus

 

8. Where exactly? MOTO Heston East

 

I'm looking at an appeals template and it has this as a possible argument in it:

Your Civil Parking Notice constitutes an invoice for payment. Accordingly your invoiced charge must include an element of VAT. However, your civil parking notice does not state either a VAT registration number or an invoice reference number and so cannot constitute a lawfully valid demand for payment.

 

Any success, with this approach?

Edited March 9, 2018 by dx100uk
merge/format

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

Please wait for the forum experts to get here, they'll tell you how to deal with this.

 

Best, HB

[BazzaS]

Well, now you've identified yourself as the driver. Not a clever move, and you should have come here first before engaging with them.

 

I suspect they won't be interested in the safety aspect / why you slept, but the fact that you could have paid them to stay longer ........ and didn't.

Edited March 9, 2018 by dx100uk
quote

[Rhino78]

Yes I'm regreting that now, yet some forums have said not to deal with the parking company, rather try to contact the services to get them to cancel it. It was very nice of the lady who replied to forward it onto appeals team for me Thanks BazzaS.

Edited March 9, 2018 by dx100uk
quote

[BazzaS]

One of the major usual planks of defence is that they have to pursue the keeper of the vehicle (who may be able to not identify the driver and still avoid 'keeper liability)'. That has been removed now they know who to pursue as the driver.

Edited March 9, 2018 by dx100uk
quote

[dx100uk]

can you scan up the NTK both sides to 1 PDF please

read upload

[Rhino78]

here

NTK.pdf

[johnjordan]

I thought the Beavis case was not to legitimise parking charges on private land but just that £80-100 was a fair amount. If I'm correct then why are these cowboys still able to make a false declaration?

[dx100uk]

because 99% of muppets payup thinking its a fine

[Rhino78]

I've only been driving over here around 3 years and this parking business is just a disgrace, like the leaches of society. I guess I'm not sure what to do now, whether to appeal through their bogus system and then to Popla. I just hate giving these low-lifes money.

[DragonFly1967]

You don't have to pay them unless they take you to court and win. That's not a certainty, but it makes life a little more awkward that you named yourself as the driver.

 

But all is not lost. I'll have another look at this tomorrow and make some comments on your options.

 

Do you pass this services on a regular basis by any chance?

[Rhino78]

Thanks DragonFly.

 

I don't go past it often at all.

I might be able to make a deliberate trip out there to view signage but I think I have the added problem of arriving in the dark and leaving in the morning light.

 

A lot of people saying to me just ignore and they will send thier red nasty letters.

A colleague at work lived in his car for six months and said he picked up dozens.

 

But I thought the Beavis case had a big effect on this?

Mr Beavis said in an interview that it "turned out to be the wrong advice to ignore". Thanks again.

Edited March 10, 2018 by dx100uk
Spacing/quote

[dx100uk]

Do not ignore!

[DragonFly1967]

Right then Rhino, first a couple of observations, and then I'm setting you some homework

 

This is the approach to Heston East. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.488471,-0.3922728,3a,75y,92.69h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTYMYbRawT6EsGh8RVwpAJQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

As we can see from that, there is, as you come off the M4, a speed limit of 40mph. Now, whilst this is a limit and not a target, it must be accepted that (smaller) vehicles (at least) will be travelling at at least 30mph as they reach the top of the exit slip, which is where the parking sign is that sets out the Terms & Conditions and therefore (so they say) forms the contract.

 

Here it is... https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4883128,-0.3905047,3a,60y,90.47h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-aMEoEz2rfr_faZxPa2rbQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Good luck with reading that from a moving vehicle, never mind understanding and agreeing to it!

 

 

Now then, for your homework.

 

Heston East is in the London Borough of Hounslow. You can start by looking at their planning portal. http://planning.hounslow.gov.uk/planning_user_accept.aspx? to find any and all planning applications, approvals, refusals and anything else related to Heston East.

 

What you're looking for in particular is planning applications and approvals made by CPP for their ANPR Cameras and all of their signage. These are applied for and approved under two different planning regimes, general planning and advertising consent (respectively) and cannot be covered under deemed consent. So they MUST have been granted planning consent for either to be there legally. A contract cannot be formed by an illegal act. So if they've broken planning laws, there is no contract regardless of what they may claim.

 

Also, you're looking for any planning applications, approvals and/or variations on any time limits for parking.

 

You may find that planning permission for the car parks was granted with no arbitrary time limits (unrestricted parking). And therefore it's either Moto or CPP that have introduced a time restriction. Whilst they might like to, they can't do that (lawfully) without varying the planning permission for the site.

 

If you can't find anything on the planning portal, then you're going to have to phone Hounslow council (Planning Department) on Monday 020 8583 5555 and you need to ask for details of all of the above. So...

 

Planning consent for ANPR cameras.

Advertising consent for all of the parking signs.

Planning consent and any variations of time limits for parking.

 

Don't contact Moto or CPP again for now, get the above information back to this thread and we can look at what they do (or don't (which is more likely)) have and formulate a plan from there.

[Rhino78]

Thank you very much DragonFly. Will do my homework this afternoon At least my faith in humanity is being restored. Thanks again

[Rhino78]

Nothing they needed approved there, so looks like it's a call on Monday.

Planning.pdf

Edited March 10, 2018 by dx100uk
merge and tidy

[DragonFly1967]

Nothing they needed approved there, so looks like it's a call on Monday.

 

Well, that's telling

 

The council, if they don't really know what they're talking about (surprisingly, some don't) will say something about "deemed consent". There's no such thing once your advertising signage exceeds a certain size, which is quite small, they need specific permission for each sign (which can be on the same application/consent).

 

If they don't have planning consent then the signs and/or ANPR cameras are placed in breach of the law. And if a party (in this case CPP) attempts to create a contract (their T&C's for parking) that was based on an illegal act (no planning consent) then the contract cannot be enforced. It really is as simple as that.

 

Whilst they can apply for retrospective planning consent for the ANPR cameras, the same is not true of the advertising signage. There is no such thing as retrospective consent for advertising, so any claim that they made in court would be doomed to failure. Though this shouldn't be the only point of your defence as some Judges still don't get it.

[Rhino78]

Ok cheers DragonFly

 

Mondays conversation with the planning department will be with the planning department regarding

 

Planning consent for ANPR cameras.

Advertising consent for all of the parking signs.

Planning consent and any variations of time limits for parking.

at TS5 9NB.

Will keep you posted. Many many Thanks.

[DragonFly1967]

Just make sure the council don't confuse the two sites (East & West bound). Whilst it's doubtful, CPP/Moto may have applied for planning permission for one side. If that had been granted, they might have assumed that it applies to both. It doesn't.

 

I won't mention the area (so that they can't change it before anyone challenges it), but there's a big retail outlet near me which is "Managed" by ParkingLie.

 

There are two very distinct car parks, separated by a road, roundabout and about 300 metres. So they must be separate sites even if they're on the same retail park. They do have planning permission for signs and ANPR on one of the sites, but not the other.

 

Just waiting now for someone to get 'caught out' on that second site and post here

[Rhino78]

Just got off the phone to the council.

No planning consent for the camera.

No advertising consent.

No applications regarding parking, although he said that might have occurred with the original services application.

Edited March 12, 2018 by dx100uk
Quote

[DragonFly1967]

Oh Dear!

 

Well, if they choose to take you to court over this, their case has already hit the iceberg. It's now just a question of how fast it's sinking

 

That won't be your only line of defence, but it'll put one hell of a hole in their case.

 

Sit back and wait for all the begging & threatening letters now. Keep them, don't reply to any of them, but do keep this thread updated with any further developments.

 

 

I know that it would mean a trip to the archives for someone at the council planning department. But it really would be good to know if there were any parking restrictions (ie. any specific period for free parking) on the original application/consent. I'd put money on there being absolutely none.

[DragonFly1967]

Perhaps, also. If it ever get's near a court. Moto and/or CPP will be able to explain to the Judge exactly what this means in relation to a (seemingly self imposed) 2 hour free parking limit and road safety.

 

I'm sure the Judge would love to know

 

[Rhino78]

Oh Dear!

 

Well, if they choose to take you to court over this, their case has already hit the iceberg. It's now just a question of how fast it's sinking

 

That won't be your only line of defence, but it'll put one hell of a hole in their case.

 

Sit back and wait for all the begging & threatening letters now. Keep them, don't reply to any of them, but do keep this thread updated with any further developments.

 

 

I know that it would mean a trip to the archives for someone at the council planning department. But it really would be good to know if there were any parking restrictions (ie. any specific period for free parking) on the original application/consent. I'd put money on there being absolutely none.

 

Ok very interesting. Thanks so much for the help and wise counsel.

 

 

 

It’s going to be a bit difficult to receive red nasty letters and not do anything about it, but I guess I’ll just have to think how satisfying it would be to pull the knowledge gathered out of a hat at court. I’d love to let them know now, but I’ll see it through if that is your advice.

[Rhino78]

Perhaps, also. If it ever get's near a court. Moto and/or CPP will be able to explain to the Judge exactly what this means in relation to a (seemingly self imposed) 2 hour free parking limit and road safety.

 

I'm sure the Judge would love to know

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]71033[/ATTACH]

 

Yes I also found this on their own website

[DragonFly1967]

It’s going to be a bit difficult to receive red nasty letters and not do anything about it

 

The way to look at it is that you're not doing nothing. You're letting them waste their money.

 

It'll give you a warm glow inside when you see how desperate they are by seeing quite how much money they're prepared to t̶h̶r̶o̶w̶ ̶a̶t̶ ̶i̶t̶ waste. I've got almost a whole drawer full of letters from PPC's, DCA's and their pet/fake Solicitors. They've probably spent hundreds of pounds chasing me for money I don't owe