CEL ANPR PCN - 16mins stay - 237-259 Greenwich High Road Shopping Centre

[zafor]

Hi, 

I have received a PCN from the above at 237-259 Greenwich High Road Shopping Centre, for pulling over in a car park for apprx 16 minute for buying water and checking on a delivery at Argos Sainsburys.

This is my first time visiting the area unaware of the conditions for parking inside the shopping centre.

I will upload a copy of notice to keeper but before I do do you have any advice on appealing this?

Thank you

 

[honeybee13]

Hello, welcome to CAG.

Please don't appeal, it could cause you untold trouble.

ETA: Actually, is this a ticket from the council or a private parking company please? Then I'll move your thread to the right forum for further advice.

HB

[zafor]

Thanks honey bee13. By the look of it it is from a private parking company. 

[honeybee13]

Apologies, I should have read the thread title properly. I've moved you to the private parking forum.

Please let us have the information requested in the forum sticky and we'll take it from there.

HB

 

[zafor]

.............................

 

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 30/07/2023

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 04/08/2023
 

[scan up BOTH SIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please LEAVE IN LOCATION AND ALL DATES/TIMES/£'s

 

3 Date received 08/08/2023
 

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

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes
 

6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No
 

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

7 Who is the parking company? Civil Enforcement Private Company

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Car Park at 237-259 Greenwich High Road, London, SE 10 8NB
 

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

BPA
 

There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure,

please check HERE

 

If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here

 Notice to Keeper Only.

Copy the windscreen or ANPR section to your thread and answer the questions...

……....

In either case scan up both sides of any letters/tickets in or appeals made out to ONE MULTIPAGE PDF ONLY

 

PCN.pdf

[FTMDave]

Thank you for posting the info.

So can you work out what the charlatans reckon you did wrong?  Is it a pay car park and you didn't pay?

That seems to be the case from  https://en.parkopedia.co.uk/parking/carpark/greenwich_high_road/se10/london/?arriving=202308082200&leaving=202308090000

EDIT  From Google Maps reviews, and Google Maps images, it's clear that it is a pay car park - with pathetic signage.

[zafor]

It is indeed.

To be honest I didn't know it was a pay car park.

To the contrary I would have paid for my time that I sought to check on my delivery at Sainsburys.

I've always thought that customers can park for up to 2 hours free of charge at any Sainsbury's store.

Can I perhaps go back to the same Sainsburys store and ask them to cancel the ticket on the grounds that I was a customer on the day and that this was simply an oversight on my part?

[FTMDave]

I doubt it, as the car park is shared by various stores.

Don't worry, the fleecers are highly unlikely to do court further down the line, but if they did the pathetic entrapping signage would scupper them in front of a judge.

 

[zafor]

thanks FTMDave. I find you inspiring. I really appriaciate the input. Do you think I' got a much better chance of killing this?

I do feel that I was charged for something that was not clear to me  but I have no way of proving it.

 

[dx100uk]

worth a try to sainsburys if you have the receipt of shopping or paid by a debit card and have bank statement??

 

[lookinforinfo]

The PCN does not comply with he Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. So the keeper is not liable to pay the charge only the driver can now be pursued. As you haven't appealed they do not know who was driving as anyone who has a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your car.

[FTMDave]

10 hours ago, zafor said:

thanks FTMDave. I find you inspiring. I really appriaciate the input. Do you think I' got a much better chance of killing this?

As dx100uk says, you might as well contact Sainsbury's  https://www.ceoemail.com/s.php?id=ceo-9117  but I wouldn't hold out much hope as it seems to be a little shopping centre rather than a Sainsbury's car park.  Also Google Maps and Parkopedia reviews are full of people saying they've been scammed, including several who paid and broke no rules yet received the demands for money in any case.  Still, it's only an e-mail so why not try?

You talk about "killing" this but there is a problem.  CEL are well known to us, they are one of the most crooked of the private parking companies.  From Google you can see that they have put just one sign at the entrance that they hope the motorist misses, and inside the car park no signage whatsoever, because the whole thing is a scam to catch motorists out.  It's obvious they won't accept any appeal and then the "independent" appeals level which was once half decent has got worse over the years and likely would find against you too.

So you either pay or are in it for the long haul.

We obviously hope you choose the latter and will be glad to help.  We generally say to ignore their bilge but when they formally threaten court to tell them you know their case is pants and taking you to court would leave a large hole in their wallet.  They then generally crawl back under their stone.  Although of course there are no guarantees.

[zafor]

sainsburys says it's not their car park. A member of staff inside the store today said that I could contact the landlord to get it cancelled and when I asked who the landlord is they turn and said to contact the private parking company in charge!!! 

[dx100uk]

land registry time.

 

[FTMDave]

I take it you went to the store today.  Did you get photos of the fleecers' rubbish signage?

I thought you were only going to e-mail the CEO.  If I'd known you were going to visit the site I would have suggested to take the photos.

[zafor]

I am contemplating to just pay now and my best plan of action would be to pay the smaller fee rather than hundreds of pounds later on. I see that the notice states "payment was not made in accordance with notified terms", which I believe ia a common reason for it being issued.

I also notice that the letter doesn't specify a grace period if there is any???

[Nicky Boy]

You evidently haven't been reading other threads. The fleecers are never going to give you any clues in their letters about grace periods, or anything else.

You certainly wouldn't be in a minority, if you just throw the towel in and contribute to the millionaire lifestyles of the owners of these "businesses".

It can take some staying power to go the whole hog.

Here at CAG, we've got an 85% success rate helping victims to win in court.

Your call.

[FTMDave]

These cases depend on contract law.

If there are a lot of clear signs, with conditions easily legible, and you don't respect the conditions, then you broke a contract and are bang to rights.

If there is just one sign which the fleecers hope you will miss, in breach of all the industry guidelines, as in this case, then no contract was ever formed, and you're in the right and owe £0.00. 

So you can pay £60.00 you don't owe and the matter will go away.

Or you can stick two fingers up to the charlatans, which will result in deforestation as they send you "scary" letters, make threats of court, and in rare cases even a start a court case - which you would win.

As NB says - your call.

Edited August 11, 2023 by FTMDave
Extra info added

[FTMDave]

2 hours ago, zafor said:

I am contemplating to just pay now and my best plan of action would be to pay the smaller fee rather than hundreds of pounds later on.

The amount will only become "hundreds of pounds" - in reality about £260 - if the fleecers take you to court and convince an unbiased judge that one paltry sign was sufficient signage and that on top of that they have proved you were the driver or complied with POFA 2012 to transfer liability to the keeper.