Highview ANPR PCN - Buzz Bingo carpark, Leicester

[WendyN]

Hi all, 

 

I have received a parking charge notice from Highview parking; details supplied in form below. 

 

 

I used the Buzz Bingo Leicester car park on 17/11/21 to use the InPost locker on those premises to return a parcel - so I was a legitimate customer who was entitled to be there. It took slightly longer than I intended, as I couldn't get the locker to work, and needed to check the information I had been given with my partner, who had asked me to return the parcel. As soon as I was able to get in touch with him to check I had the relevant information, I dropped off the parcel and left the premises.

 

Highview Parking have told me that a) I have broken their terms and conditions, and b) this is because I have overstayed (at 38 mins). However, nowhere on their car park signs does it mention anything about any kind of time limit (signs pdf attached below).

 

I have 1. Confirmation from the InPost machine itself of the parcel number and drop off; 2. Receipt from InPost confirming the drop off; and 3. Confirmation that the parcel was returned. On looking today on the InPost website, it emerges that there's a time limit of ten minutes for using this car park, but I had no idea about this, and this information is not given anywhere in the car park as far as I can tell (I visited again today, as a pedestrian this time!)

 

In summary, I was legitimately on site to use the InPost locker there, was not in breach of any of the terms and conditions on display in the car park, as far as I could reasonably tell, and left as soon as my business there was complete. So I was shocked to receive a £100 bill in the post! 

 

I would really like to appeal this, and need to do it quickly, so I would really appreciate any help or advice you can give. 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Wendy

 

For PCN's received through the post [ANPR camera capture]

(must be received within 14 days from the Incident)

 

Please answer the following questions.

 

1 Date of the infringement

17/11/21
 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date]

24/11/21
 

[scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide]

please do not put JPG Picture files into your post

 

3 Date received

09/12/21 (I have been away, so only just got it yesterday)
 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]

No
 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event?

Yes
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal]

Not yet, but plan to ASAP
 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up

N/A
 

7 Who is the parking company?

Highview Parking

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town]

Buzz Bingo carpark, Leicester
 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under.

Member of BPA, British Parking Association
 

 

PCN.pdf Signs.pdf

[honeybee13]

Hi Wendy. Thank you for doing your homework and giving us the information without us asking.

 

Please don't rush to appeal. We hardly ever recommend doing that as it rarely works and you can end up giving the PPC information that works against you.

 

If you could bear with us, I'm sure the forum regulars will be along to advise.

 

HB

[FTMDave]

That's wonderful work Wendy.  Highview don't have a leg to stand on.  The signage says "Free Parking For Bingo Customers" and you were a Bingo customer.  Their invoice doesn't even state what you're supposed to have done wrong.  It says you contravened the terms and conditions displayed on the signage which you did not.

 

The problem with appealing is that the PPCs are crooks who are used to making up fictitious reasons for denying appeals.  All they're interested in is £££££.  So what we normally recommend is to ignore their demands until they send a Letter of Claim and then reply and show them they would get a hammering if they did proceed to court.

 

Can you tell us more about the car park?  Is it for Buzz Bingo customers only?  If so it might be more productive to try to get Buzz Bingo to call their dogs off.

[dx100uk]

Postcode of the inpost machine will do

[WendyN]

Hi  FTMDave & dx100uk, 

 

To be clear, I wasn't a Bingo customer, but I was an InPost locker customer.

 

The carpark doesn't say it's for Buzz Bingo customers only – the only signs are the ones I've posted, which say that it's private property, and that parking conditions apply. Also in the same car park, against the wall of the bingo club, is an InPost Locker site (for returning parcels) and an Amazon locker site (for picking them up).

 

These aren't mentioned on the signage at all – but they must have some kind of subcontracting arrangement with InPost & Amazon to have put the lockers there, mustn't they? How can it be that they put them there, but then fine customers for parking in their car park to use them? This is the complication really – I could speak to Buzz Bingo directly, but I'm not sure of my ground on all this just yet...

 

The car park is listed on the InPost website: Buzz Bingo, 100 Beaumont Way, LE4 1DS. 

 

Thanks very much! 

[lookinforinfo]

The sign does say that you don't need to pay if you register at the bingo club. As you didn't do that  there is a grace period of ten minutes which normally allow motorists time to review the terms and leave without needing to pay. This time limit  would normally have allowed customers to drop off/pickup parcels without needing to pay. Sadly not in your case. 

 

However all is not lost. For a start their PCN is not compliant with PoFA, the rules applying to private car park companies,

 as it does not mention that they can transfer any unpaid debt from the driver to the keeper. They have written to you as the keeper so do not divulge who the driver was and they will have a very difficult job proving who was the driver since anyone who has car insurance is able to drive your car.

 

Also the sign that you showed at the entrance is not capable of forming a contract with the motorist since all it says is that the terms of the car park are inside the car park. That sign therefore is an invitation to treat. In other words you only need to accept the terms of the signage inside the car park if you want to.

[FTMDave]

I'm trying to get my head around what the fleecers reckon you did wrong, which is difficult as they were too lazy and incompetent to actually include it in their PCN.

 

"Free parking for Bingo customers" suggests the parking is not free for everybody.  Was this a pay car park?  Were any tariffs quote on the signs?

 

 

[brassnecked]

Is the parcel  and amazon box run by the Bingo Club?, as people will drop off and pick up parcels outside the club's opening times, might be that  Highview T & C's run contrary to fair usage of the parcel facilities if they are going to issue a Parking Charge Notice to someone dropping off out of  club opening hours.

[WendyN]

Hi all, and thanks *so* much for the help. 

 

Honeybee13: Thanks for this really good advice!

 

FTMDave: Highview Parking just say "the vehicle contravened the terms and conditions on the signage", but don't say how it was contravened, or what was said on the signage. It's not a pay car park, as there are no pay machines that I could see, and no list of parking charges. 

 

brassnecked: I don't know if the InPost or Amazon machines are run by the bingo club, presumably they have some kind of agreement as they are on that site? I'm not sure how to find out. The point you make about opening hours is a good one - I don't remember it being open when I went, but the opening times on their website say that it would have been open at the time. I really don't know what InPost or Amazon customers are supposed to do outside those opening hours. 

 

Lookforinfo: OK. This was hard to hear, but thanks very much for this information.

 

I now think I have been very naïve about this - I have been assuming that I would have some rights as an InPost customer using an InPost machine on their premises - turns out I have none.

 

This ten minute grace period - is this widely known? I certainly wasn't aware of it, and it's not on any of the signs on the site itself.

 

There's no specific guidance at all for users of the InPost or Amazon parcel lockers on the site. Had there been anything like that, I would have kept to the ten minutes, or parked in the free car park that's just across the road. But of course - this must be a nice little earner for them!

 

I wonder how many other people have fallen into this trap? I'm sure I'm not the first person.

 

I need to think about tactics really. I have been reading around on this forum and others for some ideas, to try to form a strategy on what to do next. I'm also now very aware of the driver vs keeper thing, which is really useful information...

 

Do I approach the bingo club manager direct to ask / insist that the charge is cancelled? I'm not sure how successful this would be, as I'm not actually a customer of theirs, so they have no reason to care about losing my custom.

 

Also, I don't know what business relationship they have to the InPost / Amazon machines.

 

Similarly, I don't think it would do much good approaching InPost either, as there's no-one actually on site, and their website says I only have ten minutes in the car park, so they would just tell me that (again - there's no information about this on site though, just on the InPost website).

 

Or do I complain, or appeal, or both? Or ignore, as the PCN doesn't mention POFA?

 

Can they then just reissue a PCN, mentioning POFA, and am I then back to square one?

 

Apologies for not knowing much about this, this is all completely new to me...!

 

Thank you again for your help, 

 

Wendy

 

Edited December 12, 2021 by dx100uk
added A few blank lines only..dx

[dx100uk]

It is not a fine...its a speculative invoice.

 

Inpost collection is hermes? Is it not? Amazon drop off urm... But anyway, whomever would have needed permission from the land owner. Its a retail park, so likewise the original planning consent would need the rules changed i expect too.

 

i believe though its much like horizon across Scotland, that the tesco 10 mins click and collect limit has been scrapped. Like kinda situation.

 

do not appeal to anyone.

 

start researching land owner and planning permission.

 

Dx

 

 

[lookinforinfo]

WendyN I am sorry that you thought my advice was hard. I gave it as a good thing that they were unable to transfer the liability for the alleged "debt" to the keeper as is normally the case. Really now that you cannot be pursued as the keeper they have no reason to pursue you since they do not know who the driver was. Indeed there is a danger for them that they are breaching the GDPR of the driver who may not want you to be informed of the problem the driver is having.

 

Another good thing for you is that even were they to send a second PCN to you, that would still not be able to transfer the onus to pay on to you the keeper as they only had 14 days to comply with PoFA.

 

 The problem with appealing to either the bingo club or the INpost people is that the driver did stay longer than the ten minutes or so that I guess  both parties deem that that time is sufficient for parcel delivery and collections to be effected. And of course it isn't on every occasion. Sometimes there will be problems getting parked and then getting out of the car park at certain busy times of the day. A problem exacerbated when there is a disabled person involved. Then of course there will be problems when the locker doesn't work at first as in the case with your driver. I don't suppose that this is the first occasion that there has been problems with Inpost customers having problems with delivering or retrieving their parcel through some sort of mechanical malfunction.

 

It could be worth trying Inpost to help you as their were problems with the locker and ask if on this occasion they could kindly help. Do not write to HIghview and do not say that you were the driver if you were. And also ask Inpost not to pass your letter on to Highview. At the same time you could ask Inpost what agreement they have with Highview about their customers entering this car park which appears to be virtually only for bingo customers.

 

As HV  cannot pursue you as keeper it is important that you do not divulge who was driving. As I said earlier, many people are able to dive someone else's car and HV will be put to strict proof as to the identity of the driver. Courts do not accept that on the balance of probabilities the driver and the keeper are the same person.

 

It does seem this car park is a trap. On the one hand the signage at the entrance allows anyone to enter since there is nothing to suggest otherwise on the sign.  Just saying that there are parking conditions inside gives no indication of who can or cannot enter. It is not capable of forming a contract with motorists it is just offering an invitation to treat. Once you read the signs inside the car park it appears to say that bingo players don't have to pay when they register in the bingo hall, but it doesn't say what anyone else has to pay and there is no facility to pay.

 

So there is a conundrum at the car park. On the one hand the entrance sign is an invitation to anyone to enter the car park while being informed that it is a private car park. Once inside the signage informs bingo players that they park for free if they register in the bingo hall. But nothing is said about motorists going to the Inpost. There is no facility to pay nor any indication that they  can even visit the Inpost .

 

This would be absurd that you couldn't visit the Inpost  because their is an active  Inpost in the car park. So it must be accessible but there is no indication when you can visit nor for how long.

I think you have to bring those points up with Inpost when you appeal to them.

[brassnecked]

LFI has indicated the situation brilliantly, and highlighted how even if they did try court it would be futile, there is no way to form any contract with a user of the iPost, and there is the GDPR angle to hit HV with later on when they are sent away.

[WendyN]

Hi both, 

 

LFI: Thank you again - your advice has been brilliant  I just meant that the law in this area is not at all what I thought it was, so it has been a steep learning curve for me! 

 

So to summarise:

• Highview would need to pursue the keeper as they do not know who the driver was.
• They cannot now pursue the keeper as the PCN does not mention the relevant part of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
• The fact that they have sent out a PCN to the keeper without the relevant part of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 explaining why could constitute a breach of GDPR (Do I have that right?)
• They cannot send out a new PCN with the relevant part in it as they are now out of time. 
• In the car park itself, there are no signs relating to InPost users, despite the fact that there is an InPost machine there - so there's no way to form a contract with any InPost user? 

I've managed to find out a bit more information about the arrangements that InPost seem to have with their machines - it seems to be some kind of licence arrangement and InPost do most of the work. 

 

So I could contact InPost customer support, explain the situation very carefully and see how I get on?

[dx100uk]

license arrangement with whom about what?

 

Cant hurt you.

But dont waffle

Simply copy? The pcn with your let too

 

Explain you were only there for xx mins and there are no signs on or near their machine that explains a time limit   Might work!!

[lookinforinfo]

When writing to Inpost stress that the locker was the problem with the length of time you stayed there. And add that you didn't know  of the short time you were allowed there and think it unfair that you have been charged for the fault of the locker. And if there were  no instructions on how the locker  worked that could be a further reason for their assistance  in quashing  the ticket. 

[brassnecked]

Might add that the Parking Fleecer makes no concession, or even if their T & C's even allow use of the facility without involving a visit to the Bingo Club.