10 minutes grace
Discussion
Is this real?
I've received a parking ticket for being 7 minutes over my ticket. I've appealed based on the fact the camera is at the exit of the carpark and it took time to leave the carpark - I was boxed in by traffic and pedestrians. Someone has now told me there's a 10 minute grace period anyway.
It's a privately owned carpark using Smart Parking. ANPR on the way in and out with ticket machines around the carpark.
I've received a parking ticket for being 7 minutes over my ticket. I've appealed based on the fact the camera is at the exit of the carpark and it took time to leave the carpark - I was boxed in by traffic and pedestrians. Someone has now told me there's a 10 minute grace period anyway.
It's a privately owned carpark using Smart Parking. ANPR on the way in and out with ticket machines around the carpark.
Easiest option is to contact the store you were at and ask them to cancel it as you were a genuine customer.
With regards to the already submitted appeal, that will be rejected and you will be advised to appeal to the IAS..
The IAS is the appeals wing of the IPC (International Parking Committee - one of the two approved parking Trade Associations that enables DVLA information to be obtained)
The IPC is run by Will Hurley and John Davies. These two are also the directors of Gladstone Solicitors, who issue many court proceedings on behalf of the IPC members.
As far as the IAS appeals go, they are nothing more than a kangaroo court - totally anonymous adjudication, no understanding of basic legal principles, evidence packs from the parking companies are not disclosed, basically appealing to them is akin to arguing with somebody who puts their fingers in their ears and shouts LALALALALALA. There is a code of practice, but "it is non-binding and therefore not mandatory" as I've had in a failed appeal.
Needless to say, this appeal will be rejected too.
Then you'll get a letter from Gladstones.
Then you'll get a Northampton CCBC claim form with woefully inadequate particulars of claim.
Then you'll spend the next 3 months pissing around with claim forms and compiling a defence, only for Gladstones to pull out on the last day prior to hearing, or to sit alongside a rent-a-lawyer from LPC Law who gets a new one torn out of them by the District Judge.
Then you'll be awarded £100 or so in costs, and Gladstones will bill the parking company around £600 for their services.
It's all one big scam.
With regards to the already submitted appeal, that will be rejected and you will be advised to appeal to the IAS..
The IAS is the appeals wing of the IPC (International Parking Committee - one of the two approved parking Trade Associations that enables DVLA information to be obtained)
The IPC is run by Will Hurley and John Davies. These two are also the directors of Gladstone Solicitors, who issue many court proceedings on behalf of the IPC members.
As far as the IAS appeals go, they are nothing more than a kangaroo court - totally anonymous adjudication, no understanding of basic legal principles, evidence packs from the parking companies are not disclosed, basically appealing to them is akin to arguing with somebody who puts their fingers in their ears and shouts LALALALALALA. There is a code of practice, but "it is non-binding and therefore not mandatory" as I've had in a failed appeal.
Needless to say, this appeal will be rejected too.
Then you'll get a letter from Gladstones.
Then you'll get a Northampton CCBC claim form with woefully inadequate particulars of claim.
Then you'll spend the next 3 months pissing around with claim forms and compiling a defence, only for Gladstones to pull out on the last day prior to hearing, or to sit alongside a rent-a-lawyer from LPC Law who gets a new one torn out of them by the District Judge.
Then you'll be awarded £100 or so in costs, and Gladstones will bill the parking company around £600 for their services.
It's all one big scam.
This was in the Foreigner Gazette or Daily Mail as it is commonly known.
2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
S11Steve said:
Easiest option is to contact the store you were at and ask them to cancel it as you were a genuine customer.
With regards to the already submitted appeal, that will be rejected and you will be advised to appeal to the IAS..
The IAS is the appeals wing of the IPC (International Parking Committee - one of the two approved parking Trade Associations that enables DVLA information to be obtained)
The IPC is run by Will Hurley and John Davies. These two are also the directors of Gladstone Solicitors, who issue many court proceedings on behalf of the IPC members.
As far as the IAS appeals go, they are nothing more than a kangaroo court - totally anonymous adjudication, no understanding of basic legal principles, evidence packs from the parking companies are not disclosed, basically appealing to them is akin to arguing with somebody who puts their fingers in their ears and shouts LALALALALALA. There is a code of practice, but "it is non-binding and therefore not mandatory" as I've had in a failed appeal.
Needless to say, this appeal will be rejected too.
Then you'll get a letter from Gladstones.
Then you'll get a Northampton CCBC claim form with woefully inadequate particulars of claim.
Then you'll spend the next 3 months pissing around with claim forms and compiling a defence, only for Gladstones to pull out on the last day prior to hearing, or to sit alongside a rent-a-lawyer from LPC Law who gets a new one torn out of them by the District Judge.
Then you'll be awarded £100 or so in costs, and Gladstones will bill the parking company around £600 for their services.
It's all one big scam.
According to this, Smart Parking are members of the BPA, which means the appeals go to POPLA if rejected by the company . http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/smart-parking/With regards to the already submitted appeal, that will be rejected and you will be advised to appeal to the IAS..
The IAS is the appeals wing of the IPC (International Parking Committee - one of the two approved parking Trade Associations that enables DVLA information to be obtained)
The IPC is run by Will Hurley and John Davies. These two are also the directors of Gladstone Solicitors, who issue many court proceedings on behalf of the IPC members.
As far as the IAS appeals go, they are nothing more than a kangaroo court - totally anonymous adjudication, no understanding of basic legal principles, evidence packs from the parking companies are not disclosed, basically appealing to them is akin to arguing with somebody who puts their fingers in their ears and shouts LALALALALALA. There is a code of practice, but "it is non-binding and therefore not mandatory" as I've had in a failed appeal.
Needless to say, this appeal will be rejected too.
Then you'll get a letter from Gladstones.
Then you'll get a Northampton CCBC claim form with woefully inadequate particulars of claim.
Then you'll spend the next 3 months pissing around with claim forms and compiling a defence, only for Gladstones to pull out on the last day prior to hearing, or to sit alongside a rent-a-lawyer from LPC Law who gets a new one torn out of them by the District Judge.
Then you'll be awarded £100 or so in costs, and Gladstones will bill the parking company around £600 for their services.
It's all one big scam.
BlueHave said:
This was in the Foreigner Gazette or Daily Mail as it is commonly known.
2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
And she admitted to leaving the private retail parking to head into town to do a bit as well, maybe she should have walked a little faster 2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
speedyguy said:
BlueHave said:
This was in the Foreigner Gazette or Daily Mail as it is commonly known.
2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
And she admitted to leaving the private retail parking to head into town to do a bit as well, maybe she should have walked a little faster 2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
BlueHave said:
This was in the Foreigner Gazette or Daily Mail as it is commonly known.
2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
So she wasnt 2 seconds over the limit but 10 minutes and 2 seconds. Everyone knows the rules, much easier to stick to them and have an easy life.2 seconds after the 10 minutes grace, haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3889048/Mo...
Also hate people that use their children as an excuse for rule breaking.
woodyTVR said:
Is this real?
I've received a parking ticket for being 7 minutes over my ticket. I've appealed based on the fact the camera is at the exit of the carpark and it took time to leave the carpark - I was boxed in by traffic and pedestrians. Someone has now told me there's a 10 minute grace period anyway.
It's a privately owned carpark using Smart Parking. ANPR on the way in and out with ticket machines around the carpark.
Smart Parking is a member of the BPA - http://www.britishparking.co.uk/BPA-Approved-Opera...I've received a parking ticket for being 7 minutes over my ticket. I've appealed based on the fact the camera is at the exit of the carpark and it took time to leave the carpark - I was boxed in by traffic and pedestrians. Someone has now told me there's a 10 minute grace period anyway.
It's a privately owned carpark using Smart Parking. ANPR on the way in and out with ticket machines around the carpark.
You were told correctly about the grace period.
BPA AOS CoP Version 6 dated October 2015 page 9 paragraph 13.4 said:
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.
All members sign up to the CoP as part of being allowed to join - http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AO...Although the above says 'should' not 'must', Smart Parking is clearly not acting in the spirit thereof.
Furthermore ANPR is flawed technology in that it can only record the entry and exit time of the vehicle to/from the site, NOT the period for which you were actually parked. Unless the signs establish a contract based on the former (and this must be clearly communicated at the point of entry when the vehicle is likely to be in motion), rather than the latter, then the PPC is p1$$ing into the wind imo.
Red Devil said:
All members sign up to the CoP as part of being allowed to join - http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AO...
Although the above says 'should' not 'must', Smart Parking is clearly not acting in the spirit thereof.
Furthermore ANPR is flawed technology in that it can only record the entry and exit time of the vehicle to/from the site, NOT the period for which you were actually parked. Unless the signs establish a contract based on the former (and this must be clearly communicated at the point of entry when the vehicle is likely to be in motion), rather than the latter, then the PPC is p1$$ing into the wind imo.
Nice one thank you. Stupid that their system doesn't account for this really.Although the above says 'should' not 'must', Smart Parking is clearly not acting in the spirit thereof.
Furthermore ANPR is flawed technology in that it can only record the entry and exit time of the vehicle to/from the site, NOT the period for which you were actually parked. Unless the signs establish a contract based on the former (and this must be clearly communicated at the point of entry when the vehicle is likely to be in motion), rather than the latter, then the PPC is p1$$ing into the wind imo.
nikaiyo2 said:
Can I suggest you post your POPLA appeal on pepipoo, as common sense alone is not always enough to guarantee a win.
Ditto, common sense doesn't usually work, you need to submit a detailed response to POPLA, covering all the reasons why they should reject the ticket. Although the 10 minute grace time will be the main winner.You mentioned why don't they build it in to their system, to allow for a grave period? Well, that's because most of their victims will pay up, especially after the appeal is automatically rejected. Not many will have the will to go on to POPLA, or want to put themselves at risk of going to court - even though its only a small claims court.
As above, check some POPLA appeals on Pepipoo.
Thanks guys. I've read a few forums and read through the BPA code of conduct and there's a very clear set of options for attack.
I've gone with the grace period. Well actually not grace, I've gone with the difference between being parked and trying to leave and my actual parking time being within the time on my ticket. I have also said that even if I was parked my time from ticket expiry to exit is still within the minimum 10 minute grace in the BPA guideline.
The cheeky gits at Smart Parking have including my time to park and get a ticket and also exit (they've totalled it up) and have said 11 minutes over my 1 hour ticket on their rejection.
I've said that it is 4 mins from entering to getting a ticket - evidenced by the ANPR and the ticket time. And 7 mins to leave the carpark i.e. under the 10 mins again as confirmed by the ANPR, I've also suggested reviewing the CCTV (assuming there is some) which shows me being delayed by other traffic out of the carpark.
As a second approach I have said the ANPR signage isn't clear enough - something they have to do to legally enforce a ticket. It states that it is used to enforce 'Parking Contract' not entering or leaving the carpark. It also says you have 10 mins to leave if you decide you don't want to park i.e you can drive in, do a lap of the carpark and leave as long as it's within 10 mins. So adding the first 4 mins goes against this.
I put another paragraph in about the fine being disproportionate to their loss but I understand this holds no weight since the Bevis vs Parking eye case. £9 a minute when it's only £1.80 an hour does seem a tad excessive though. Although I understand this is common sense but holds no merit now.
Whilst I'm pretty sure the grace period will see me okay. I have tracked down the owners of the carpark and so intend to write to them too as I did spend a reasonable amount of cash at 3 of the outlets on the site.
I've gone with the grace period. Well actually not grace, I've gone with the difference between being parked and trying to leave and my actual parking time being within the time on my ticket. I have also said that even if I was parked my time from ticket expiry to exit is still within the minimum 10 minute grace in the BPA guideline.
The cheeky gits at Smart Parking have including my time to park and get a ticket and also exit (they've totalled it up) and have said 11 minutes over my 1 hour ticket on their rejection.
I've said that it is 4 mins from entering to getting a ticket - evidenced by the ANPR and the ticket time. And 7 mins to leave the carpark i.e. under the 10 mins again as confirmed by the ANPR, I've also suggested reviewing the CCTV (assuming there is some) which shows me being delayed by other traffic out of the carpark.
As a second approach I have said the ANPR signage isn't clear enough - something they have to do to legally enforce a ticket. It states that it is used to enforce 'Parking Contract' not entering or leaving the carpark. It also says you have 10 mins to leave if you decide you don't want to park i.e you can drive in, do a lap of the carpark and leave as long as it's within 10 mins. So adding the first 4 mins goes against this.
I put another paragraph in about the fine being disproportionate to their loss but I understand this holds no weight since the Bevis vs Parking eye case. £9 a minute when it's only £1.80 an hour does seem a tad excessive though. Although I understand this is common sense but holds no merit now.
Whilst I'm pretty sure the grace period will see me okay. I have tracked down the owners of the carpark and so intend to write to them too as I did spend a reasonable amount of cash at 3 of the outlets on the site.
Edited by woodyTVR on Thursday 24th November 13:17
I've already put my appeal in.
I tried Pepipoo a number of years ago regarding a speeding issue and I'll be honest the advice I was given was pretty poor. As in there was no basis for the answer other than some random on the internet giving his opinion. Is there a secret experts section?
I tried Pepipoo a number of years ago regarding a speeding issue and I'll be honest the advice I was given was pretty poor. As in there was no basis for the answer other than some random on the internet giving his opinion. Is there a secret experts section?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff