URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 62807--------------------------------------------------
       SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after Payment
       Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: swim80
       Date: March 17, 2025, 4:20 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       On the 9th March the driver of the vehicle (indicated in the NtK
       notice here:
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/OjsKHdw)
       parked at the SIP Car
       park, Spaniel Row , Nottingham.
       Upon arrival the driver parked and then proceeded to pay at the
       ticket machine located at the car park entrance. The driver
       estimated the stay to be not longer than 2 hours and purchased a
       ticket in accordance with this expected duration (see here for
       prices:
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/DfzQXky).
       At the time of purchase,
       the machine indicated that no ticket would be provided. The
       driver used a contactless debit card to make payment and upon
       completing the transaction, the on-screen display of the payment
       device indicated that the payment had been approved.
       Approximately one hour later the driver returned and left the
       car park.
       On the 16th March the registered keeper of the vehicle received
       a parking charge notice related to the stay of the vehicle on
       the aforementioned date. Upon subsequent consultation with the
       driver it became apparent that, in spite of on-screen indication
       to the contrary, the contactless payment met with a technical
       error as evidenced by the driver's bank statement (see here:
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/OYR1v4D)
       and thus payment for the stay was
       not taken.
       Based upon the above evidence of technical payment error, the
       keeper of the vehicle believes that the parking charge notice
       was issued in error and would like to ask the advice of the
       forum on how best to proceed to challenge this.
       Best Regards,
       The Registered Keeper
       #Post#: 62812--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: swim80
       Date: March 17, 2025, 4:52 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi all,
       As an aside, the registered keeper asked Deepseek R1 to provide
       a letter of appeal in line with the the private parking sector
       single code of practice. This is included below for reference
       and would be grateful for a review of the
       appropriateness/correctness of this:
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/twBsuPP
       #Post#: 62922--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: b789
       Date: March 17, 2025, 12:51 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       That letter says that you have a screenshot of the permit
       machine screen showing the transaction as "Approved".It also
       says you have a  bank statement showing "no transaction" for the
       date???
       You have only shown us a photo of the payment machine tariffs.
       Is the screenshot of the declined payment actually from a bank
       statement? Where is the screenshot of the "approved" payment
       from the payment machine?
       You are referencing the BPA CoP which was superseded in October
       last year by the BPA/IPC Private Parking Single Code of Practice
       (PPSCoP).
       Not sure exactly what you are expecting. The Notice to Keeper
       (NtK) is PoFA compliant so they can transfer ability from the
       unknown driver to you, the known keeper. However, PoFA
       compliance is not only with reference to the NtK. The signs at
       the location must adequately bring to the attention of the
       motorist the charge for breaching the terms and conditions. You
       can also use the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) for frustration
       of contract.
       #Post#: 62932--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: swim80
       Date: March 17, 2025, 1:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       Thanks for your help and review of this.
       I have a screenshot of the driver's bank statement only (see
       here:
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/S8Nbbxk
       ); indicating the technical
       error. At the time of payment, the payment machine indicated
       that the payment was approved and thus there was no reason to
       capture a photo. Are you able to confirm that this is sufficient
       evidence to challenge the PCN?
       Many Thanks,
       The Registered Keeper
       #Post#: 62943--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: b789
       Date: March 17, 2025, 1:55 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Any initial appeal to an unregulated private parking company
       will be rejected, no matter what you plead. The secondary
       appeals process will depend on which ATA the company belongs to.
       If they are BPA members, then you would be able to appeal to
       POPLA with a roughly 40:60 chance of success. If they are an IPC
       member, ten you chances of success with the IAS are around 4:96.
       Either way, if the secondary appeal is unsuccessful, that
       decision is not binding on you and you can then ignore
       everything except if they issue a claim for the alleged debt.
       Even then, there is every likelihood that they will never let it
       get as far as a hearing and if they did, your chances of success
       are high. The most likely scenario is that if they let it get as
       far as a claim, is that the claim is struck out or discontinued.
       You have to decide whether you are prepared to fight this all
       the way.
       #Post#: 64010--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: swim80
       Date: March 25, 2025, 3:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       Thanks for your support. I intend to fight this. I'd like to
       kindly request you review the appeal letter I have prepared
       (
  HTML https://imgur.com/a/y2mhc0C)
       before I populate the details and
       submit my appeal. It is revised to ensure accuracy of available
       evidence and to reference the latest PPSCoP (v1.1).
       Kind Regards,
       TRK
       #Post#: 64075--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: b789
       Date: March 25, 2025, 9:22 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       As I already mentioned, any initial appeal, no matter how clear
       you try to make it, is going to be rejected. So, with that in
       mind, whatever you send is going to bee a wasted effort.
       As SIP are IPC members, their offer of a secondary appeal to the
       IAS will be about as useful as a poke in the arm with a sharp
       stick. Personally, I wouldn't bother with an IAS appeal although
       others on here will disagree. The choice is yours.
       Where this will ultimately be settled is if it is referred to
       the county court as a small claim. No one who is here receiving
       advice and following it pays a penny to the likes of SIP. Any
       claim, if they even try to take this that far, will either be
       struck out or discontinued. Even if you were to be one of the
       less than 1% that were ever to get as far as an actual hearing,
       you'd be likely to win anyway.
       It's up to you how you want to proceed. But thigh the above in
       mind, you make your choice. The appeal you have shown is clear
       and follows logic. It's a pity that SIP and the IAS don't.
       #Post#: 64085--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: swim80
       Date: March 25, 2025, 10:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       Thanks for your quick reply. I guess my aim here is to make a
       clear and defensible appeal from the outset regardless of the
       anticipated futility of the appeal process. Should the case find
       it's way to court, I'd like to believe that evidence of
       adherence to correct and due process throughout weighs in my
       favour. Thanks again for taking the time to reply to mine and
       all of the other cases on this forum. Your help is invaluable! I
       shall keep the post updated with the state of progress of this
       case.
       Many Thanks,
       TRK
       #Post#: 67550--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: swim80
       Date: April 17, 2025, 9:52 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hi,
       An update on the progress of this situation: The parking
       operator SIP has sent a further demand for payment without any
       acknowledgement of the written appeal. An appeal letter was sent
       by recorded postal delivery within the allowable appeal time to
       the specified appeal address. I'd like to ask for a
       recommendation on a suitable next response. Should I send a
       further letter highlighting that an appeal letter was sent in
       the allotted time or simply ignore all further correspondence
       from SIP?
       Kind Regards,
       TrK
       #Post#: 67561--------------------------------------------------
       Re: SIP, Nottingham, Spaniel Row: Parking Charge NtK after
       Payment Machine 'Technical Error'
   DIR By: b789
       Date: April 17, 2025, 11:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Stop wasting money by sending letters by recorded delivery. An
       absolutely useless service which, at best can only prove
       non-delivery. ALL correspondence must be by email which is also
       CC'd to yourself. It is instant and you also have proof of
       delivery.
       If you insist on using snail mail, the you only need to send it
       by first class post with a free "Prof of Posting" certificate
       from any post office.
       You don't seem to have gathered the fact that you are not
       dealing with some firm that has any customer service ethos. They
       are a bunch of ex-clampers operating on the very edge of
       lawfulness.
       They re not going to accept any appeal you send (they haven't
       and they've ignored it) and appealing to the IAS will be an
       equally salutary experience if you want to even bother with
       them. You can try and make a forma complaint to the IPC but
       again, you will be fobbed off and considered a mug by them. But
       hey, fill your boots if you insist.
       I have already explained that the only way this will end in
       success for you is after they make a claim.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page