I use a Citroën Berlingo van for work, signwritten with my firms logo (private firm, I am an employee). Whilst carrying out a few hours work at a hospital last week I parked in a ‘pay on exit’ car park, managed by TPS. There was insufficient contractor parking and all Street parking was by permit. When I returned to my van there was a parking Charge notice on the window, the details say reason for charge is ‘parked in visitor and patients parking area’. I searched around the car park and looked at the terms and conditions board, but there was nothing to say I couldn’t Park in there, so I took photos etc and paid my normal parking payment using the machine and left. On my way out, next to the entrance there was anither terms and conditions board with one difference to all the other notices – no contractor or staff parking.
I’ve used this car park Ince before, on a Saturday morning, no ticket issued and never realised I couldn’t Park there. Im a bit miffed that there can be a unique terms and conditions board with this extra exclusion on. There were at least 10 boards in the car park with no mention of no contractor parking.
what’s the consensus. Should I appeal, or pay up? As it’s a firms van I’m reluctant to put my employer in a position where they are receiving threats of court action etc for non payment.

Tel them you were visiting someone but came to the hospital in a works van…

How do they know you weren’t just using your works van to attend an outpatient appointment? Or visit a relative?

I would have thought that a POPLA appeal based on insufficient signage would be a goer. Head over to the Pepipoo forums, they have more info.

I had something similar(ish) recently. Theres a letter template that you can download online that says you wont identify the driver etc etc

We (mrchrispy on here) too haven’t heard a reply back yet:

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/euro-carpark-100-parking-charge-any-experiences

i bet you’ve jinxed us now 😀

The ‘not identifying the driver’ thing was great advice about ten years ago. The rules have changed since then.

Challenge it, they’ll reject it, go to POPLA who’ll uphold it.

ssshh 😀

I think they will struggle to prove both that you were working there and that their signage was sufficient

As above appeal to them lose appeal to POPLO and win

Take pictures of the signs that don’t mention that contractors can’t park in that location – they might be useful if you appeal.

As it’s a firms van I’m reluctant to put my employer in a position where they are receiving threats of court action etc for non payment.

From what I understand, the the way these private charges work is that they are against an individual, as opposed to a car owner, so by admitting it was you driving at the time you should be able to have all the dealings direct without your employer getting dragged into it.

I’d appeal, it seems you have a pretty strong case.

Don’t pay up – EVER!

not identical but a guy from work got a parking charge from one of those car parks (free for first 3 hrs – loads more if longer)
he got a letter stating a parking charge of >£120. he used a template letter off moneysavingexpert and they cancelled the charge. mostly on teh basis of reasonable parking costs.

pricate comapnies can’t issue a fine from what i know, but they cna ask strongly for a charge and try their luck to see if people pay?

putting s sign at the EXIT and nowhere else would be grounds for insufficient signage, as one wouldn’t notice it until you were leaving. appeal by which they must abide by the issue of fairness in the process

he got a letter stating a parking charge of >£120. he used a template letter off moneysavingexpert and they cancelled the charge. mostly on teh basis of reasonable parking costs.

That could soon end. Last year some clever dick QC introduced the concept of “commercial justification” to PPC tickets/invoices. The point being that the high charges are not a genuine pre-estimate of losses, but are commercially justified in that they provide a deterrent against abusing the parking rules – not a penalty for abusing them. An important distinction that some judge or other apparently agreed with. His decision has now been tested at the Court of Appeal but no transcript of the case is yet available. There is likely to be a significant change in how PPCs operate upon the court transcript being made available, but who knows which party it will favour…

putting s sign at the EXIT and nowhere else would be grounds for insufficient signage

It is not clear from the OP if the sign was clear on entering the site or not…

On my way out, next to the entrance

Sounds to me like he drove out and looked at the site on site entrance.

But I still say he should tell them he was visiting someone – it is perfectly feasible to be going to a hospital in a liveried vehicle whilst on personal business.

Detterant?

So how does that work in my case where its misleading or fraudelent, especially so with my boss who mistakenly used the access/exit as a through road twice in one day. Guess which two of the four ANPR shots they used saying she had been on their land for 5hours. Ive used that shortcut before too.

What happens if you enter but dont like the terms and decide to exit?

Just for clarity, the entrance was also the exit, on a narrow steep hill leading into the car park. The sign with the terms on which stated ‘no contractor parking’ was right next to the entrance, but to be honest you dont stop at the entrance to a car park to read the terms in detail especially when its on a potentially hazardous location such as this one, you are just concentrating on not entering the car park in the face of an on coming vehicle!

Im going to contest it, but im not sure on which part – misleading signage/different terms on signage within car park or that I was visiting and not working.

signage, given that’s the truth and everything.

Never pay any parking fine unless it’s it’s from the police or council. I’ve had loads of letters threatening court but just ignored them and nothing happens

quite good advice above..

You HAVE to appeal this within 14 days
As its not your van you don’t want a lease company or your employer paying and deducting from your salery. its a dogs arse of a job to get back..

So Soft appeal naming yourself as the driver (this means they can’t chase the registered keeper)

along the lines of,

The charge isn’t a genuine pre-estimate of loss, insufficient signage and the fact you did actually pay for your parking (also GPOL)

They will refuse this. with this refusal you should get a popla code (independent appeals service) you then need to appeal to them. The top line must be “not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. This is virtually a guaranteed win at popla but also include the fact you paid means there has been no loss!
Insignificant signage, and as they aren’t the land owner they actually have no right to bring the charge.

Go to pepipoo for proper advice and templates you can copy and edit for your own situation

don’t leave it though, the lease company will almost certainly pay it and bill you, and they will add an admin fee..

By all means appeal on “not a genuine pre-estimate of losses”, but remember what I said above. For now, you should be in the clear:
a) the initial “commercial justification” judgment was from a circuit judge, and as such only only has “persuasive” force on the lower courts. Had it been a high court judge it would have been “binding” on the lower courts. So don’t let the TPS letters fool you into thinking it has been settled once and for all.
b) as the initial judgment has been appealed (although we don’t know the outcome yet), most courts would take very dim view on TPS quoting it as a precedent in an effort to make you pay up.

In short, appeal on NAGPOL, but do so quick whilst you still can.