Jump to content
mr deeds

Parking Eye ANPR PCN - overstay - 4hrs 10mins when its 4hrs free parking - Morrisons Aldershot

Recommended Posts

1 Date of the infringement 24/7/18

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 27/7/18

 

3 Date received 31/7/18

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] Y

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] No

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up n/a

 

7 Who is the parking company? Parking Eye

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Morrisons Aldershot

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.IAS

 

Mrs deeds went to the cinema with some friends, the cinema is in a complex with Morrisons, and various restaurants, so she parked in the car park. Mrs deeds and friends arrived early, went for food and drinks and then watched the film, spending 4 hours & 10 minutes in the car park (all the time using the retailers who are part of the complex.

 

The PCN states there is a maximum parking time of 4 hours, which given the film lasted 1 hour and 54 minutes doesn't leave a massive amount of time for food and drinks before/after.

 

Do we have any possible chance of contesting this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a stated minimum 10 mins grace period on these speculative invoices


PLEASE DONT USE REPLY WITH QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there is a stated minimum 10 mins grace period on these speculative invoices

 

Excellent advice, I've just checked on the BPA Code of Practice and you are correct its states

 

"13.2 If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes."

 

and

 

"13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where

parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes."

 

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ParkingLie will try to argue that your vehicle was in the car park for 4 hrs 10 min and 59.9 seconds and there's only a 10 minute grace period.

 

However, also of note in that scenario is that it is not a "time in the car park" limit but a "Parking" limit. So, unless they can show that 'Scotty' had a hand in beaming your vehicle in to a car parking space or some other major scientific discovery that you've made and managed to keep rather quiet, there must be a certain amount of time upon both entry and exit that the vehicle is not "parked" at all.

 

So, whilst they'll huff and puff and threaten and cajole, I wish them all the luck in the world in getting that past a Judge... They're gonna need it :lol:


We could use your help

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

 

 

Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.

 

If I've helped you at all, please feel free to click on the little star under my posts and leave feedback :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the point is it is a MINIMUM of 10 mins so if they are saying you were there an extra 10 mins 59 seconds then still covered by grace period and any case de minimis.

 

More troubling is that PE claim to have a 17 point checklist to ensure that only eligible garbage is ever issued. They fail miserably on that quality control front as you will see if you look up the term "double dipping"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An update on this and advice on how I should respond please?

 

I appealed the PCN as follows;

 

Whilst I was not the driver of the vehicle, the driver of the vehicle was a customer at Morrisons, Prezzo and Cineworld. They went shopping, had a drink with friends and then watched the 17:20 showing of the film Mamma Mia. They were unaware of there being a 4 hour limit on parking, but given they were customers of three of the outlets the car park serves it would seem the length of stay was appropriate.

 

Further under clause 13.2 and 13.4 of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice Control and enforcement of parking on private land and unregulated public car parks Version 7 - January 2018 (of which you are a member) it states;

 

13.2 If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes.

 

13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.

 

Clearly you are not following your own code of practice by allowing the minimum grace period, therefore I dispute the validity of the PCN issued, herein known as the speculative invoice.

 

I reserve the right at a later date to provide further evidence as may be required and specifically do not agree to the tick box clause on the next page which states "

I confirm I have attached all supporting information available to me, and understand that I will be unable to provide any additional evidence at a later date, unless specifically requested by ParkingEye" which is neither enforceable or legally binding but has to be ticked to submit this appeal.

 

Below is their response;

 

We are writing to advise you that your recent appeal has been referred for further information.

 

You have stated that you were not the driver of the vehicle at the date and time of the breach of the terms and conditions of the car park, but you have not indicated who was.

You have already been notified that under section 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 that the driver of the motor vehicle is required to pay this parking

charge in full. As we do not know the driver’s name or current postal address, if you were not the driver at the time, you should tell us the full name and the current postal

address of the driver.

 

You are warned that if, after 29 days from the Date of Issue, the parking charge has not been paid in full and we do not know both the name and current address of the driver, we have the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from you, the registered keeper. This warning is given to you under paragraph 9(2)(f) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to our complying with the applicable conditions under schedule 4 of that Act.

 

Please note, if you have made or wish to make an appeal on behalf of the driver, and you do not provide the full name and current postal address of the driver, ParkingEye will be obliged to deal with the representations made in your name.ParkingEye have placed this charge on hold for 28 days to enable you to provide the evidence requested. If this information is not provided within 28 days, the appeal may well be rejected and a POPLA code provided.

 

many thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So predictably they ignore their breach of their own terms that you pointed out and just repeat the unenforceable threat.

 

You have given them the reason and they are considering it, I suggest that their next response is sorry to have bothered you, but I doubt it.

 

You are under no obligation to tell them who the driver was and you never were or will be, unless you choose to do so.

 

The charge is as unenforceable for you as the RK as it is for the driver, so they are just trying to scare you into paying, hold tight for now.

 

They'll probably just send it on to the next threatogram stage but it won't go near court if they have any idea what they're doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think, leave it just wait and don't respond in any way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep


PLEASE DONT USE REPLY WITH QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

1. Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

2. Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

3. Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

4. The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please fill in your quit date here

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?




  • Tweets

  • Our picks

    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
       
      THIS IS HOW THE PHONECALL WENT 
       
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
    • I was talked into signing up with Future Comms (future-comms.co.uk) who cold-called me to change my mobile contract to them, via 02, rather than EE. I have a small business (only me!) and it's a business contract. True, the 4G network is better for my area. This company seemed to be a marketing set-up for various telecoms companies, so I assumed anything I signed would be with 02 and didn't think it might be a problem.
       
      They sent an email whilst I was on the phone to set up the direct debit mandate with my bank which I signed electronically. That was the first, of many, problems I found. Apparently THAT was my contract, binding me to 3 years and no 'cooling off' period, because I was a 'business' (meaning any consumer rights did not apply). When I subsequently asked in writing for a copy of my contract, that is what they sent - when I argued it was a DD mandate they insisted it was my contract!
       
      2 days later they asked for my phone details to get it unlocked which I sent. 10 days later, EE closed my account, so I changed the SIM card to 02 that had come a few days before. No network! They had done nothing about unlocking it. Fortunately I was lucky with EE who managed to give me the right codes, rather than the usual 10 days to go through Samsung.
       
      By this time I was suspicious of their set-up and wanted to cancel. As I said earlier, I found myself trapped into a 3 year contract with no 14 day cooling off period (they don't offer that). Promises to deal with my complaints never happened, promised return calls neither....and on and on.
       
      Ofcom's rules apply to consumers and small businesses (under 10 employees), yet this shower don't acknowledge that. They just repeat and repeat that I am a business so it doesn't apply. To cancel the contract I have to pay the full 3 year's fees!!
       
      I would like to know if others have had similar experiences? Or does anyone know how I can maybe declare the 'contract' unenforceable? I have never before been locked into something without a clear written contract, with t&c's! And, yes, I have asked, and yes, I have been ignored.
      • 84 replies
    • Future comms!. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415706-future-comms/
      • 10 replies
    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
×
×
  • Create New...