DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 24693--------------------------------------------------
ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: Vike
Date: June 1, 2024, 6:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello Everyone
Today a Private Parking Charge Notice was received from
ParkingEye for overstaying at the Aldi/B&M Car Park in New
Southgate. This was only the second time the driver had been at
this location and was used to parking at shopping centre car
parks in the past without any problem and where most allow two
hours parking or paying on exit.
The driver shopped at both B&M and Aldi both of which were busy
and left straight after. (receipts available from both) Today
the registered keeper received a PCN from ParkingEye alleging
that the allowed time of 1 hr 30 minutes was exceeded by 22
minutes.
Do I, as the registered keeper have any grounds for appealing
this ticket, or would it be better to ask Aldi and or B&M to see
if they can intervene?
Many thanks for any advice.
HTML https://imgur.com/a/KF88Rf3[/img]][img]https://imgur.com/a/KF88Rf3[/img]
HTML http://[img
#Post#: 24699--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: Vike
Date: June 1, 2024, 7:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi again
For some reason the inserted url from imagur for the image of
the PCN does not show up on posting. It worked on my last topic!
What am I doing wrong please?
#Post#: 24715--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: b789
Date: June 2, 2024, 7:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Vike link ---
>
> For some reason the inserted url from imagur for the image of
the PCN does not show up on posting. It worked on my last topic!
>
> What am I doing wrong please?
>
--- End Quote ---
I don't know but I will reproduce them here for you:
HTML https://i.imgur.com/btxodf1.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/xJ7WD56.png
--- Quote from: Vike link ---
>
> Do I, as the registered keeper have any grounds for appealing
this ticket.
>
--- End Quote ---
Yes. I have had exactly the same issue that I dealt with on
behalf of a friend for a PE NtK that failed to define the
relevant land.
The location stated in the NtK is not a valid address. "Aldi
Southgate" on the front and "Aldi New Southgate" on the back of
the NtK mean nothing. Enter either of those "locations" into
Google maps and no Aldi Southgate or New Southgate comes up. The
town or city is not mentioned and there is no post code to even
reference it to.
On that basis alone, the NtK is not PoFA compliant and
therefore, only the driver is liable. Because they have no idea
who the driver is, unless you tell them, inadvertently or
otherwise, they cannot hold you liable as the keeper. Under no
circumstances must you reveal the identity of the driver. You
are appealing solely as the keeper.
In the case I mentioned, PE lost at POPLA (case 6063403839)
because they could not rebut the fact that the location as
described in the NtK was not relevant land due to the ambiguity
of the location and therefore the NtK was not PoFA complaint and
as the driver was not identified, the keeper could not be liable
and so the PCN had been issued incorrectly.
My advice is for you to appeal to PE with the following:
--- Quote ---
> I am appealing as the keeper, Parking Charge Notice (Ref:
________) for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you
allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge. I note
from your correspondence that you are attempting to hold me
liable as the registered keeper, under Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, your Notice to
Keeper (NtK) is not compliant with the requirements of PoFA.
>
> I drew your attention to the relevant paragraph from PoFA
9(2)(a):
>
> [indent]9(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to
keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in
accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are
met.
> (2) The notice must-
> (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was
parked and the period of parking to which the notice
relates.[/indent]
>
> Your NtK states the location as "Aldi Southgate" on the front
and "Aldi New Southgate" on the back. A search on Google maps
for "Aldi New Southgate" brings up a list of 5 different Aldi
stores with the following post codes: N11 1QJ, SE25 5AJ, EN4
8SL, L14 2DE and EN1 1TH. None of those locations identify the
relevant land. Therefore, as the relevant land is not
identified, PoFA cannot be used to hold me liable as the keeper.
>
> I would also like to point out to you another recent POPLA
decision that went against ParkingEye for exactly the same
reasons as outlined above. Please refer to POPLA case
6063403839 from January 2024.
>
> There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will
not be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with
this matter and look forward to your confirmation that the
charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal,
you must issue a POPLA code.
--- End Quote ---
Whatever you do, do not submit the above appeal before the 6th
June as they could, in theory, re-issue the NtK with a location
that does comply with PoFA in that there is at least a post code
or town mentioned.
#Post#: 24754--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: Vike
Date: June 2, 2024, 2:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi b789. Thank you so much for your response. Yes, I see no town
or postcode on either side of the PCN.
I do, however, see that Aldi New Southgate is stated on both the
front and the back, albeit both without a town or postcode. Have
I missed a third instance of the location stated as Aldi
Southgate on the front?
I also note that on the reverse it states "You are warned that
if, after 29 days from the date given(which is presumed to be
the second working day after the Date Issued), .......".
I can see the Date Issued as 30/05/2024, but what is the date
given? Is this the date the keeper is presumed to have received
the NtK, the Private version of a Civil PCN being served?
Does the clear omission of a town or postcode on either side of
the NtK still invalidate the NtK, per-se in terms of it not
being PoFA compliant?
I will, as per your advice, not lodge the appeal until 6th June.
Please would you explain for my own benefit, the significance of
that date? I note that it is seven days from the Date of Issue.
Thank you again for your advice, b789.
#Post#: 24757--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 2, 2024, 3:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Vike link ---
>
> I do, however, see that Aldi New Southgate is stated on both
the front and the back, albeit both without a town or postcode.
Have I missed a third instance of the location stated as Aldi
Southgate on the front?
>
--- End Quote ---
Seems to be listed as Aldi New Southgate on both sides unless
I've missed the same thing as you - but the overall argument
still holds, you'll just need to tweak b789's suggested wording
slightly.
--- Quote from: Vike link ---
>
> I can see the Date Issued as 30/05/2024, but what is the date
given? Is this the date the keeper is presumed to have received
the NtK, the Private version of a Civil PCN being served?
--- End Quote ---
A notice sent by first class post is presumed delivered 2
working days after the date it is posted (aka 'issued'),
paragraph 9(6) of PoFA refers..
--- Quote from: Vike link ---
>
> Does the clear omission of a town or postcode on either side
of the NtK still invalidate the NtK, per-se in terms of it not
being PoFA compliant?
--- End Quote ---
It doesn't invalidate the notice, per se. Whether or not they
complied with PoFA does not affect whether or not the driver
owes the money being demanded. However, if they do not meet the
requirements of PoFA, they cannot recover any unpaid charges
from the keeper (where they don't know who was driving).
ParkingEye almost certainly won't agree with your appeal. POPLA
should, but can be a mixed bag with location based arguments.
--- Quote from: Vike link ---
>
> I will, as per your advice, not lodge the appeal until 6th
June. Please would you explain for my own benefit, the
significance of that date?
--- End Quote ---
As b789 noted, this is so that they cannot re-issue the notice
with a more thorough address, as it will be too late for them to
do so.
#Post#: 24782--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: b789
Date: June 2, 2024, 6:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As [member=103]DWMB2[/member] has stated, the driver will always
be liable for the charge. PE have no idea who the driver was
unless someone tells them. Thy only person that can tell them
who was driving is the keeper. The keeper is under no legal
obligation to reveal the identity of the driver.
PE can only transfer liability from the unknown driver to the
known keeper if they comply with all the requirements of PoFA.
Whilst they have complied with the usual basic requirements such
as giving the NtK within the prescribed time and using the
necessary wording, they have not complied with the requirement
to specify the relevant land where the vehicle was parked.
By failing to specify the relevant land, the NtK does not fully
comply with PoFA and so they cannot hold the keeper liable.
Yes, PE will reject the appeal but I have won at POPLA against
PE with exactly the same scenario back in January this year
where they issued a PCN for a vehicle parked at “Lidl, St
Neots”. A search on Google maps for Lidl St Neots brings up two
Lidl’s in St Neots with different addresses and post codes.
When it came to POPLA, PE sent a comprehensive rebuttal but
failed to rebut the fact that the location in the NtK was
relevant land because it could not be positively identified
where it was. The assessor accepted that because the relevant
land could not be confirmed definitively, the NtK was not PoFA
compliant and therefore the keeper could not be liable and so
was issued incorrectly.
Of the two Lidl’s in St Neots, only one had restricted parking
operated by PE. It didn’t matter. They failed to identify the
relevant land just as they have done in this case.
I have full appeal from the January case and it only needs a
slight adaptation for his case. Send the appeal as suggested and
if they reject it, we move on to the next stage.
#Post#: 25114--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: Vike
Date: June 6, 2024, 10:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello again. I've just been online to ParkingEye to lodge my
appeal and see that the full postal address of Aldi, New
Southgate, together with the city and postcode is stated on the
appeal page for details of the Parking Charge Notice.
Does this change anything at all or is it the fact that the city
and postcode is NOT stated on the PCN itself that leaves PE open
to challenge?
the other question I had in my original post was whether it was
worth asking Aldi itself if they can get PE to cancel the
charge. this was never answered. I know it's a long shot, but
after all if the store was not so busy, the driver wouldn't have
overstayed the 1hr 30min time limit.
And one other thing, where it says "Appeals should be submitted
within 28 days of the delivery of the Parking Charge and whilst
under assessment, the value of the charge will not increase."
does this mean the discounted value of £40 will not increase or
the original £70?
Thank you for your help.
#Post#: 25118--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 6, 2024, 10:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The address should be stated in full on the notice.
Always worth trying with the retailer - they may be renting if
it's a retail park so you may also want to try and find out who
owns the land and approach them.
#Post#: 25147--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: Vike
Date: June 6, 2024, 3:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi [member=26]b789[/member]
I'm about to send my online appeal to PE. Please could you give
it a quick check-over to make sure I have not made any mistakes
as I have amended your draft to reflect the fact that it states
the location only as "Aldi New Southgate" and not as
originally thought, as Southgate on one side and New Southgate
on the other.
Is it worth mentioning that the driver explained that the stores
were busy and 1hr 30mins is insufficient and unfair?
Thank you for your help.
"I am appealing as the keeper, Parking Charge Notice
(Ref:477653/424465 for vehicle registration mark LP16 JDK, in
which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge.
I note from your correspondence that you are attempting to hold
me liable as the registered keeper, under Schedule 4 of the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). However, your Notice to
Keeper (NtK) is not compliant with the requirements of PoFA.
I draw your attention to the relevant paragraph from PoFA
9(2)(a):
9(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for
the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with
this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2) The notice must-
(a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was
parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates.
Your NtK states the location only as "Aldi New Southgate". A
search on Google maps for "Aldi New Southgate" brings up a list
of 5 different Aldi stores with the following post codes: N11
1QJ, SE25 5AJ, EN4 8SL, L14 2DE and EN1 1TH. None of those
locations identify the relevant land. Therefore, as the relevant
land is not identified, PoFA cannot be used to hold me liable as
the keeper.
I would also like to point out to you another recent POPLA
decision that went against ParkingEye for exactly the same
reasons as outlined above. Please refer to POPLA case
6063403839 from January 2024.
There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not
be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with this
matter and look forward to your confirmation that the charge has
been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must
issue a POPLA code."
If all is OK I will submit the appeal tomorrow.
Thank you.
#Post#: 25148--------------------------------------------------
Re: ParkingEye Aldi New Southgate
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 6, 2024, 3:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Vike link ---
>
> Is it worth mentioning that the driver explained that the
stores were busy and 1hr 30mins is insufficient and unfair?
>
--- End Quote ---
ParkingEye won't care about that. Those are the sort of
situations they make money from.
As an aside, have you apoken to Aldi and/or B&M?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page