URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 98283--------------------------------------------------
       Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: Zibster
       Date: November 15, 2025, 11:33 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The registered keeper of a vehicle has received a Parking Charge
       Notice for the above location. The driver attended a two day
       course at the hotel. On the first day they attended in a
       different car and submitted a registration number different to
       that on the Notice but paid for two days parking. On the second
       day they attended in the vehicle which received the Notice but
       did not make note of that at the reception. So to be clear two
       days had been paid for, the Notice is for the 2nd day.
       Can you advise how to make a successful appeal please.
       Is it by stating that the land (if appropriate) is not relevant
       for schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 or using a
       way to explain the situation as occurred.
       In either event can you provide the correct method of appeal.
       Thanks as usual folks.
  HTML https://i.postimg.cc/9fSgDD45/IMG-4291.png
       #Post#: 98285--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: November 15, 2025, 11:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Please read and act on
  HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
       For example,
       --- Quote ---
       > 3. Post the notice(s) you have received – as well as providing
       important context, the notices may contain/omit details that can
       be used to help you successfully fight the charge. Upload photos
       of any and all notices you have received from the parking
       company. You should show us all pages of the notice(s), remove
       personal details (name/address, PCN reference number, Vehicle
       Registration Mark), but show us all dates and times. Details
       that you think are trivial could help you win, so don’t leave
       anything out.
       >
       > Ideally you will have sought advice here before taking action,
       but if you have already responded, show us any correspondence
       you have sent, and the response(s) you have received in return.
       --- End Quote ---
       You have obscured too much information.
       #Post#: 98288--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: Zibster
       Date: November 15, 2025, 12:03 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       apologies
  HTML https://i.postimg.cc/FRQvfrn7/IMG-4294.png
       #Post#: 98327--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: InterCity125
       Date: November 16, 2025, 2:32 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Show us the back of the PCN.
       #Post#: 98329--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: Zibster
       Date: November 16, 2025, 3:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://i.postimg.cc/sgGKh6sB/IMG-4292.png
       #Post#: 98339--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: b789
       Date: November 16, 2025, 4:14 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       That Notice to Keeper warrants a formal complaint because it is
       in breach of the PPSCoP section 8.1.1(d). The location is not
       relevant land so the Keeper cannot be liable. Only the driver
       can be liable and they have no idea who that is unless the
       Keeper blabs it, inadvertently or otherwise.
       For now, simply appeal, ONLY as the Keeper, with the following:
       --- Quote ---
       > I am the registered keeper. ParkingEye cannot hold a
       registered keeper liable for any alleged contravention on land
       that is under statutory control. As a matter of fact and law,
       ParkingEye will be well aware that they cannot use the PoFA
       provisions because Manchester Airport is not 'relevant land'.
       >
       > If Manchester Airport wanted to hold owners or keepers liable
       under Airport Bylaws, that would be within the landowner's gift
       and another matter entirely. However, not only is that not
       pleaded, it is also not legally possible because ParkingEye is
       not the Airport owner and your 'parking charge' is not and never
       attempts to be a penalty. It is created for ParkingEye’s own
       profit (as opposed to a bylaws penalty that goes to the public
       purse) and ParkingEye has relied on contract law allegations of
       breach against the driver only.
       >
       > The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have
       been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation
       of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable.
       ParkingEye have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us
       both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 98369--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: Zibster
       Date: November 16, 2025, 7:11 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thank you b789.
       So I assume your advice is that this is the best method of
       appeal rather than evidencing that the day had been paid for but
       as a different registration number?
       Thanks again.
       #Post#: 98370--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: jfollows
       Date: November 16, 2025, 7:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Parking Eye get 0p from however much you paid for parking.
       Their contract allows them to go after and keep the money from
       people who break their rules. It’s their only source of money.
       #Post#: 99468--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: Zibster
       Date: November 24, 2025, 1:44 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Out of respect to the site I'm just letting you know that my
       daughter who was the driver called the Radison hotel directly
       and their reception cancelled the Parking Notice and we've had
       written confirmation.
       It's an interesting conclusion as it shows the client might
       actually have some control rather than just blaming the
       outsourced enforcement provider.
       #Post#: 99477--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Radison Blu hotel on Manchester airport complex
   DIR By: b789
       Date: November 24, 2025, 3:12 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       We always assume that any recipient of a PCN has used common
       sense and tried Plan A, which is to always get whoever contracts
       the parking operator to get it cancelled.
       Plans B, C and D are what we deal with here.
       What you need to understand for future reference is that the
       recipient of the NtK, the Keeper, should never, ever, EVER
       identify the driver. Only the driver is ever liable. Unless the
       operator is able to rely on PoFA 2012 to be able to transfer
       liability from the unknown driver to the known Keeper, then
       blabbing the drivers identity, inadvertently or otherwise, is
       the proverbial shooting oneself in both feet with a single
       bullet.
       In this case, the location is the Radisson Hotel at Manchester
       Airport which lies within the Manchester Airport boundary and is
       therefore land that is subject to statutory control (airport
       byelaws), which means that it is not relevant land for the
       purposes of PoFA and so, had this continued to appeal and
       beyond, as long as the driver is not identified, they would
       eventually have nowhere to go with this PCN.
       Luckily for you, your daughter has written confirmation that the
       hotel has told their agent to cancel the PCN. Don't be surprised
       though if ParkingEye turn around and say they will not cancel it
       and they want £20 to cover their costs.
       As long as there has been no admittance by the Keeper that they
       were the driver (whether they were or were not), there is no
       basis in law for ParkingEye to pursue the Keeper for any money.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1