DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 13929--------------------------------------------------
Re: Queen Elizabeth Hospital PCN
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: January 18, 2024, 4:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The notice does claim that they have a right to recover the
charge from the keeper under Schedule 4 of PoFA.
That doesn't make it compliant, granted, but do you reckon
there's enough there for the IAS to agree?
#Post#: 13930--------------------------------------------------
Re: Queen Elizabeth Hospital PCN
DIR By: Nosy Parker
Date: January 18, 2024, 5:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
DWMB2 is absolutely right. I had the wrong document open on my
screen when I posted my previous reply which I have deleted!
I still think the notice fails to comply with the statutory
procedure for keeper liability, but not so blatantly that the
biased so called "Independent Appeals Service" (IAS) will
definitely allow the appeal. It's worth appealing as IAS
decisions are not binding on motorists so even if the IAS appeal
goes the wrong way, Wise Parking would need to take the case to
court in order to enforce the charge and if OP has the will and
temerity to play the long game according to the rules, they
should be able to defeat the PCN.
So here is my updated advice. OP should either pay the PCN for
a quiet life or play the long game starting with an online
appeal to Wise Parking. If OP is up for the fight, here's what
I suggest
1. OP amend their initial post to remove any clue as to who was
driving.
2. Appeal online to Wise Parking as follows:
I appeal as keeper. I am not obliged to identify the driver and
I decline to do so. You cannot transfer the driver's liability
(if any) to me as keeper because your PCN does not satisfy the
conditions for keeper liability set out in paragraph 9 of
Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("POFA") and
it is now too late for you to deliver a POFA-compliant notice to
keeper. Specifically (and without limitation) the PCN does not
specify "the period of parking to which the notice relates" as
required by POFA paragraph 9(2)(a) - "N/A - N/A" is not a
period. I require you to cancel the PCN and erase my personal
information from your database.
Do not click any drop down menu items or state anything that
might indicate who was driving. If the online system tries to
insist on driver details, come back for further advice.
I expect Wise Parking will reject the appeal and offer you the
opportunity of a further appeal to IAS. Come back for more
advice if that happens.
#Post#: 14226--------------------------------------------------
Re: Queen Elizabeth Hospital PCN
DIR By: Goatzie1234
Date: January 23, 2024, 5:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So sorry for the radio silence. I didnt get an alert about your
response so im only seeing it now. I will raise the appeal as
advised and let you know the outcome.
I have been exchanging emails with PALS but havent got very far
to be honest!
#Post#: 14253--------------------------------------------------
Re: Queen Elizabeth Hospital PCN
DIR By: b789
Date: January 24, 2024, 6:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As part of your “Plan A” find the name of the CEO of the NHS
Trust that operates the hospital and email him/her with a
complaint about this. If you are getting nowhere with PALS, this
is another way to get this moving in the right direction.
You should also email your MP and raise this issue and ask for
their intervention in the matter. Too many victims of these
unregulated private parking companies never even attempt Plan A
and if they do, put far too little effort into it when, in fact,
this is probably the easiest way to get these cancelled.
#Post#: 14346--------------------------------------------------
Re: Queen Elizabeth Hospital PCN
DIR By: Goatzie1234
Date: January 26, 2024, 5:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I have some updates.
PALS route - PALS escalated my issue to Wise (with my consent)-
however, unfortunately, at that time my complaint named me as
the driver. I hope this doesnt blow my case.
They came back with the 'nothing we can do' routine so I pushed
back and now it has been escalated to their 'Head of Security',
however its been a while now and I havent heard anything
further.
Wise appeal route - I appealed to Wise with just the text
provided here (thanks for that!) - They rejected the appeal, but
did not respond to any of the points made on my appeal, instead,
they seem to be responding to the points I made to PALS which
they escalated to them.
This appeal has been considered in
conjunction with the evidence gathered by the parking attendant.
Our records show that the notice was correctly
issued as your vehicle was parked in breach of the Terms and
Conditions of Parking.
The signage on site clearly states that you must park wholly
within the confines of a single marked bay.
Unfortunately you did not adhere to these terms so the parking
charge was issued correctly.
For parking to work on site careful consideration has been made
to where cars can park, and these areas have
been marked with bays to show where the parking may happen.
Anyone outside of these marked bays can cause
an obstruction to the other users of the site. Although you feel
that where you parked was not an obstruction, the
trust has put a lot of thought into how to line their car parks.
We do ask you to consider that this is a hospital where
many old and unwell people need to visit, some feeling quite
poorly, some with less than perfect eyesight, some
with poor reactions or spatial awareness.
When the area determined for them to turn a corner or progress
down a roadway is blocked, even partly by a
vehicle parked where it should not be (as with your car where it
was), it means that the experience of some is
greatly challenged. This is the reason there are no spaces where
you parked, as it is intended to be kept clear to
allow for all users the car park, not just the more able with
keen senses.
Consequently, after careful consideration your representation
has been declined.
MP route - My MP responded with this:
I was very sorry to learn of your experience parking at the
Queen Elizabeth and appreciate fully your frustration with how
the case has been handled by Wise Parking. I appreciate fully
that this occurred at an already stressful and emotional time in
light of your partner’s condition. I trust your partner is
recovering well.
I continue to press the British Parking Association (BPA) to do
more to hold Wise Parking and other parking companies to the
industry’s code of conduct, to which it is a signatory.
The BPA has its own code of practice and appeal procedures to
which they expect their members to adhere. If a private parking
company does not follow these codes responsibly, they risk being
banned from accessing DVLA data and will be unable to issue
parking charges.
I would therefore encourage you to make a complaint directly to
the BPA. Enquiries to the BPA’s Approved Operator Scheme can be
made via the following site:
www.britishparking.co.uk/Contact-AOS
In terms of reforming the current arrangement, Parliament
already passed into law in March 2019 the Parking (Code of
Practice) Act, which provided for a mandatory code of practice
for operators of private car parks.
However, the Government has dragged its heels and we are still
waiting for the new Parking Code of Practice to be fully
implemented. The Code was temporarily withdrawn in June 2022
“pending review of the levels of private parking charges and
additional fees”, according to the Department for Levelling Up,
Housing and Communities.
I have long pressed successive Secretaries of State for
Transport to bring forward the new Code as a matter of urgency
so people have better protection against private companies, like
Wise Parking, and will continue to do so.
I trust the above makes clear my thinking on the issues your
case raises and that the suggested lines of enquiry you might
pursue are of use to you.
NHS Trust CEO route - still waiting on a response.
Thanks :)
#Post#: 14360--------------------------------------------------
Re: Queen Elizabeth Hospital PCN
DIR By: b789
Date: January 26, 2024, 9:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, your MP is a bit of a thicko. Wise is an IPC member, not a
BPA member so all that waffle is useless.
You must make sure that your PALS complaint goes as high as
possible up the food chain. Anything that does not involve
getting them to get Wise to cancel the PCN is useless. Some
lowly minion saying that they will liaise with Wise is not going
to get you anywhere. Your escalation up to the Trust CEO is your
best bet.
If Plan A fails, do not bother with Plan C (appeal to the
kangaroo court that is the IAS). You move on to Plan D which to
weather all subsequent reminders and debt collector letters. You
wait for if/when they decide to issue a letter of claim and you
respond to that robustly. If/when they issue a claim, you can
include the Jopson v Homeguard appeal in your defence.
Stopping for a short duration to attend to a small vicissitude
is not parking. In your case, dealing with an emergency medical
issue to unload and assist the patient into the hospital before
returning to park the car was precisely that.
--- Quote ---
> 20. Neither party was able to direct the court to any
authority on the meaning of the word “park”. However, the
Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following: “To leave a vehicle
in a carpark or other reserved space” and “To leave in a
suitable place until required.” The concept of parking, as
opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration
of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading
or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of
short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a
puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it;
otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars.
Delivery vans, whether for post, newspapers, groceries, or
anything else, would not be accommodated on an interpretation
which included vehicles stopping for a few moment for these
purposes. Discussion in this area left the respondent in obvious
difficulties, from which the attractive advocacy of Miss Fenwick
was unable to rescue it.
>
> 21. Whether a car is parked, or simply stopped, or left for a
moment while unloading, or (to take an example discussed in
argument) accompanying a frail person inside, must be a question
of fact or degree. I think in the end this was agreed. A milkman
leaving his float to carry bottles to the flat would not be
“parked”. Nor would a postman delivering letters, a wine
merchant delivering a case of wine, and nor, I am satisfied, a
retailer’s van, or indeed the appellant, unloading an awkward
piece of furniture. Any other approach would leave life in the
block of flats close to unworkable, a consideration which those
instructing Miss Fenwick seemed reluctant to accept. I am quite
satisfied, and I find as a fact, that while the appellant’s car
had been stationary for more than a minute and without its
driver for the same period (whatever precisely it was), while
she carried in her desk, it was not “parked”. Accordingly, for
that reason too, the appellant was not liable to the charge
stipulated in the respondent’s notice.
--- End Quote ---
The above appeal is persuasive and any reasonable district judge
would likely consider this in this case. You can read the whole
transcript of Jopson v Homeguard here:
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ezhkj6epu66l1r/JOPSON-V-HOMEGUARD-2906J-Approved.pdf?dl=0
#Post#: 14365--------------------------------------------------
Re: Queen Elizabeth Hospital PCN
DIR By: Goatzie1234
Date: January 26, 2024, 11:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok thanks!
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page