Hmm fingers crossed they disappear. If not I’ll get some Beta blockers to help me handle the ‘scare’

Hey FTMDave, Nope. Nothing so far. There was a latter dated 19th (sent before all the emailing commenced) saying they now wanted the full £80 as the 14 day ‘discounted’ period had ended. But other than that not a peep.

Thanks everyone. Will wait a short while before I send it.

The time of 4hrs and 4 mins is the time between time of entry and time of exit not parking. The PCN also states that ‘by parking within this car park the driver is bound to these terms and conditions’. No car park was parked in! As clearly stated in both emails. they have not provided the timings for actual parking anywhere. Only time of entry and exit.

And todays reply which came minutes after the email was sent! … The vehicle was captured entering and exiting at the times and date stated on the letter and therefore remained on University land – the point at which they entered/exited is where University land begins. Once a Parking Charge Notice is issued we request the registered owner details from the DVLA. If the registered owner is not the driver of the vehicle at the time the PCN was issued they can transfer the liability to the driver as stated and provided on the letter. In your initial appeal you stated: “The driver of the vehicle was transporting a disabled badge holder to their hospital appointment and in the absence of any actual disabled parking facilities by the Jubilee Wing sought parking elsewhere. The driver drove to the 'Orange Zone' car park and after reading the sign in the car park saw that they could not park there without an orange zone permit and so left the car park immediately. The driver then parked the car on double yellow lines on the road outside the car park and before all the signage for the orange zone but still within the ANPR monitored area”. This leads me to believe you spoke to the driver of the vehicle at the time and they did remain on University land and therefore should have paid for their stay. You also stated: “Since the driver was not parked in the orange zone or in the car park they assumed usual double yellow lines parking applied for disabled badge holders and left the car parked there displaying the blue badge for the duration of the appointment in Jubilee Wing. The University of Leeds is privately owned land so this reasoning does not apply. Orange Zone signage specifically states “Vehicles must be parked fully within the confines of a single marked parking bay. There is also a ‘Private Land’ sign at the entrance and refers drivers to check the signage. I would like to point out at this stage that although a mistake MAY have been made, the hospital was not deprived of any income for the car park as the car was parked outside of the car park itself”. Given your statements it has been proven the T&C’s of parking on University land have been breached and therefore this PCN still stands. If you wish to appeal the PCN then please find the relevant information in my previous email. We will not respond to any further correspondence regarding this PCN. Pfft! Looks like I’ll be court bound with the poor registered keeper then.

Oh . Thank you

Agreed lookingforinfo. They’re asserting that the car was parked in their car park. They’ve come to this conclusion because the ANPR isn’t directly outside the car park it’s positioned on the road leading to the car park, and it captured the car going in and out of that area on the road itself. I’m assuming they are defining the whole area as private land and in their ‘orange zone’ but the main roads are public and any orange zone signs are placed beyond the ANPR cameras.

Thanks NickyBoy and Lookingforinfo have double checked online and yes the land is definitely public. ok will redraft. Do you suggest I leave out the sch4 bits too? thank you!

A quick phone call to the council... they tell me that the roads Willow Terrace Road and Vernon Road (Just before the bend leading to another car park), are both adopted by the council and so one would assume double yellow line parking rules do actually apply there. So unless they can show that the driver was parked in the car park surely they can't pursue this? Dear Parking Appeals, I appreciate yur kind offer of reducing the charge, however, there is no valid reason for the charge to the registered keeper in the first place. Firstly because (as I understand it) the car was parked on Vernon Road outside the Chapel. The road is council owned (as confirmed by the council a short time ago). Since the road is council owned and adopted by the council then normal double Yellow Parking Rules apply here. I would also like to take this opportunity to point out that: Under Schedule 4 S9 [2][e] - (e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper— (i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; The PCN does not ask that the keeper should pay the charge as it should under Schedule 4 S9 [2][e] - . As it doesn't the PCN is not compliant so the keeper is not liable. Under Schedule 4 S9[2] [a] (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; There is no mention of the period of parking on the PCN. The timing mentioned on the PCN by way of the images, is the time spent between the arrival and departure of the car which involves driving to the parking spot and later from the parking spot to the exit. This therefore cannot be called a parking period. This reinforces that the keeper is not responsible. In order to rely on Sch 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 the PCN must meet all the criteria in order to recover from the Registered Keeper. Since you have not met this criteria the Keeper is not liable and is under no obligation to name the driver (which they unfortunately cannot due to their advanced Alzheimers and Vascular Dementia). I would again politely request you to cancel the PCN since there is no chance of you winning in Court.Since you now know the keeper is not liable, to issue a court summons would be in breach of their GDPR. How's that?

Thanks LFI. Should I send that to the appeals team at the University or is that shooting myself in the foot by letting them know I’m ‘in the know’?

. You crack me up!

I know. I just can’t bloomin decide. I have enough on my plate right now and could really do without this. But I REALLY don’t want to give in

I take that back, she was no help. So... I'm going to reply to the appeals teams' email: Could you please clarify who owns the land on which the university sits and also the area of 'Willow Terrace" outside of the car park. Please also provide pictures of where the vehicle was 'parked' and details of the duration of parking as this is not detailed on the PCN. (Gives them a hint about where i'm heading with that?) Or do I just scrap that idea and go straight IAS?

Thanks Dx, have emailed the hospital asking the question re land ownership (the lady there has been helpful thus far).

I am definitely up for a fight. You guys all helped me last time and it resulted in a win… Gladstone’s had to cough up £50. Sweet justice. Id go as far as small claims just to see the look on the J’s face when they see an elderly Alzheimer’s patient defending themselves! The car was parked outside of the car park on the roadside on double yellow lines. It’s unclear as to whether it’s university or Hospital grounds as they are all literally on the same land. Also it is a University Hospital. Is it worth me responding to the email above stating (again) that the car was not parked in the car park? The PCN says ‘By parking within this car park the driver is bound to these terms and conditions and liable to pay a charge if they breach these terms and conditions. The reason we issued the PCN is: FAILURE TO PAY FOR THE DURATION OF THE STAY. Also the reply to the appeal says “The driver has driven past those signs, entered the car parks and thereby have accepted the conditions of parking on University land.” I didn’t know that driving past a sign it means one accepts the T&C’s? What if it’s not legible from the car? I could also include LookingForInfo’s points above? Im going to drive up and take a look at the area so I can get pictures to show you. Thanks all.