UKH

Beware! Don't forget to log in to the parking system if you go to the Foundry. The firm enforcing the parking are pretty slick at handing out penalty notices if you don't enter your car registration on the system (as I found out myself!). Worth noting, the Foundry have only brought in the enforcement to ensure that customers have a chance of finding some parking - they have nothing to do with any fines imposed.....

I remember people used to use their car park while being somewhere else (it was thought) during the 90's when I used to go a lot then, there'd sometimes be a fairly full car park and hardly anybody climbing.

Edit: This a curious post to find disliked, it 'is' what used to happen - re a quiet Foundry and a fairly full car park.

As always - if it's a private firm, it's not a 'penalty' or a 'fine', it's a speculative invoice.  There is absolutely no reason you should pay it if you contest it correctly.

And as landowners, the Foundry is almost certainly able to cancel one of these invoices.  The PPC can't raise it without their permission.  If they say they can't they're either lying or they have signed a truly ridiculous contract.

As John says is free to park so long as you register your car reg on every visit. Lots of signs to remind you, although pretty annoying of you forget and get a ticket - not sure how much control the Foundry has for cancelling tickets, but might be worth asking them if you do get caught out. 

Given the ongoing problems of the flats and music business next door blocking all the car spaces, they have been forced to either accept that they're are no spaces for their customers or bringing in one of the schemes. Of course of people didn't insist on parking their cars on other proles property in the first place, this kind of parking scheme would never be needed.

Indeed. 

The proles getting property! Wot next?

Mick

I had this last year at the castle (I did enter in my reg but only after 2 hours climbing) but got it revoked when I sent an appeal to argue it. 

As Jamie said, it's not a council enforced fine so you there's wiggle room to argue it and win. It costs nothing to appeal and if you extend your paying period so if you lose you can still pay the lower fine (I beloved). You may even win and get a "well don't do it next time" response!

I would guess the Foundry want to run a superb climbing wall giving their customers the best service they can at the fairest price they can.
I would guess that really they would just rather their customers could park on their car park, and other people just went and did their thing.
Sadly there are a group of people out there who because they are too cheap to pay to park or the place they are going has no parking, feel its ok to take their problem, and give it to the Foundry and their customers.
 

I completely agree that a way is needed to prevent parking by people not using the wall.  But I completely disagree with the way that most PPCs do it. 

This won't be a slap on the wrist, it'll be an invoice for probably £60 or more (I can't see which company this is so not sure exactly what their 'charge' will be).  They will threaten that if you don't pay quickly, they can double the charge.

There is an appeal route, but if you take it and lose the charge is automatically doubled.  And if you take that appeal route, you'll find it's run by - guess who - the PPCs.  It has completely nonsensical and hidden rules, which include never allowing an appeal on mitigating circumstances.  So if the OP writes to say that he was a legitimate user, and provides evidence that he was indeed climbing, he'll be rejected and his charge doubled.  There are horrendous tales of people having their appeal rejected for reasons that any sane person would allow.

The only way to win at this kangaroo court is to quote arcane legislation showing that there is something legally unsound in the way the PPC has worked - and there always is.  Without support from others who've worked out how to win, it is essentially impossible for the layman to do this.  Does this sound fair?

These aren't reasonable people - they are the ex-cowboy clampers.  I would be completely in favour of a PPC which sensible charges and a reasonable appeal process - but this doesn't exist.

One thing I will hold my hand up for - it does look like the Foundry doesn't own the car park as it's shared between several businesses, so I retract my comment about their being able to cancel it.

I'm pretty sure thats not true. To get money from you they would require to take you to court. After informing them the wall users in the car were using the parking correctly (do not ever name the driver) you are fully within your rights to ignore further correspondance from them if you were registered at the wall that day and it was the car used  as it was legitimate use. It's cheap to send threatening letters but expensive for them to go to small claims court and so they rarely bother even with people misusing the parking. One main reason is only the driver could agree to any parking contract. The company can get the Registered Keeper's address from the DVLA: but you don't have to tell them who was driving. This isn't exactly arcane stuff.

PoFA 2012 allows for the PPC to establish Keeper Liability.  If the driver refuses to name themselves then the PPC can take the keeper to the small claims court.  Some PPCs don't do this - they just send an ever-repeating series of threatening letters - but some (notably Parking Eye) do.  They issue them in bulk via Northampton SCC.

One company has a lovely twist on this.  They wait five years (as claims remain valid for six years) and then they send documents to the address they got from DVLA at the time.  If you've moved in the interim and your mail isn't forwarded, the first you find out is once you have already lost by default and have a CCJ against you.  Again, totally honourable and fair.

The arcane rules you need to win at PoPLA are (usually) not to do with keeper liability, although some do screw up the rules they need to establish it by getting dates wrong.  They are to do with the charge not being a genuine pre-estimate of the PPC's losses.

Far simpler to just key 7 characters into the iPad they have on reception. 

I'm not sure how any of that changes the main argument in what I said. They won't likely take you to court if they know you used the parking correctly and they won't win if they do (your 5 year story sounds apocryphal to me do you have any proof?).

This is pretty obviously if you forgot. I've forgotten to sign my car in many times at my wall but Im not worried as I was using the car park legitimately. This is the sort of advice people should follow.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4816822

In reply to Offwidth:

CEL taking someone to SCC when they could provide proof of legitimate use of the car park: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=116681

The same company taking someone to court in 2015 for an incident that occurred in 2010: http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=97687&st=20&p=1101051...

Claim issued 5 years and eight months later: http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t112346.html

There really is no shortage of evidence!  Yes, landowners can get charges cancelled, but that is not the case at the Foundry.

I completely agree that the easiest thing to do is to key in your reg - of course.  But I disagree that the approriate penalty for forgetting (or keying it in wrongly) is £60 odd quid, and I strongly disagree that the appropriate penalty for appealing on the grounds that you were a legitimate user is a doubling of the charge.

This is very true, and if we all simply parked legally and considerately these companies would go away as they would be no longer profitable.  Then cases like this (sort of "collateral damage", if you like) wouldn't happen either.

For the record you can apply to have a CCJ (or indeed many types of prosecution such as Railway Byelaw ones for non-payment of fares) set aside if you can prove (e.g. by having moved house) that you did not know about the court date.

Can you. I wondered about this. Say you were off on a big trip 6-12 months and drove in a Bus lane, then parked your car on your drive and sorned it, or not, then off you went on your big trip. Would it be possible that by the time you had comeback that the legal process would have gone so far, that your car would have been taken in Lieu of debts.

That's an interesting point - obviously your car can't be given back if it's been crushed, but it *might* be possible to be compensated if when the case was re-presented you did not lose.

One example case:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5690125

I have been caught out by one of these PPC's before (not the Foundry) - I accidentally entered the number plate of my old car having just got a new one. I appealed to the parking company which got me nowhere (you can't talk to anyone and they are less than reasonable), so I called the business that owned the plot of land and spoke to the manager to explain my dilemma. He was reasonable and understanding, and arranged for the parking notice to be cancelled. I offered a positive online review as thanks so everyone was happy (except the parking company...)

So assuming the Foundry are the managers of the land and they employ the parking company, they can arrange for charges to be cancelled - just talk to them, explain the situation and any human with common sense will help you out. Just don't make a habit of it....

Unfortunately they aren't.  But yes, in cases where you can ask the landowner to rescind the charge, that is the first step.

There are PPCs which use a contract that bars the landowner from doing this, though, so it's not always a silver bullet.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-judgment.pdf

On my brief reading of this case, I think you would struggle in court

Read the Money Saving Expert thread. No one has their fees doubled if they deal with the ticket appropriately. Sure it's a shitty dishonest trick that needs changing in law but it's only rarely a real financial consequence unless you believe them.

Providing examples of 5 years notifications  is nothing like the same as what you said (deliberate planning to wait to do so). Again this 6 year limit should be illegal.. 1 year is enough.

If you can prove you legitimately used the parking in the appeal (following advice on the linked thread above) you are highly unlikely to be taken to court and won't lose if you have to go.. You are spreading misinformation which might make climbers pay fines when they don't need to. The PPC companies are indeed cowboys... please don't make their fake bullets look real.

I really don't understand.  I think we are arguing more or less the same thing at each other.  I'm the one who first described PPCs as cowboys, and I regularly post here trying to help people not pay their fake invoices.  If you get it right there is NEVER any reason to give these scum a penny.

I know that thread from MSE very well - I have read it many times. 

The key point that I am trying to get across is that, if you have tried to get the landowner to rescind the fnie and that has failed, and if you take the correct next step (which is to appeal to PoPLA if the PPC are members) and you do this solely on the grounds that you were a legitimate user, you will not suceed.  PoPLA and IAS will not accept mitigating evidence.  You have to get this appeal right, and that's not trivial.

As for the six year thing not being deliberate - do you think it's coincidence that the debt collection firms (which are usually housed in the same office as the PPC) wait till five and a half years have gone past before chancing their claims?

How do you think parking should be enforced.
It must be cost and time effective for the landowner.

The PPC fees should be genuinely linked to how much it costs to enforce them, rather than making them as high as possible.  There should be an appeal process that is reasonable and fair.

I would have thought £60 reasonable. What makes it expensive and the reason a landowner cannot do it themselves, is smart arses on the internet arguing over every little wrinkle. If they just said, fair cop and paid up, then that would be great, and no need for enforcement companies.

You think £60 is a reasonable penalty for forgetting to key your numberplate in or transposing two digits?

No, but if it was the Landowner doing it, the problem would be much less likely to arise. The PPC companies are a symptom of a problem. The Problem is selfish arrogant people who do not care a toss for anyone else and think they can park where they want. If it was not for people like this, you would not need any parking enforcement.
EDIT; my rant is not aimed at people who key in the wrong number such as the OP, I think they are the victims of the aforesaid selfish people

We are still arguing because any enforced payment is nothing to do with the PPC: it's a small claims court matter and I can't see how they will find against a genuine user in such circumstances. The PPC know this and so won't take it to court (the vast majority of unpaid 'fines' are dropped by the PPCs and so rarely end up with a summons anyhow). If you have many examples of smalls claims courts awarding against parking fines in this way I'll apologise. Most people contending such fines  will not have been abiding by any contract. In contrast the Foundry climber will have been (apart from forgetting to put in the pin) so the law is on their side.

Yes there are many other possible reasons why an attempt at enforcement might be delayed (might just be  rrediscovered lost paperwork). Its simply not commercially sensible  to do this regularly on purpose.

As Neil pointed out the CCJ issue you claimed is also incorrect.

If you are so upset they are cowboys (as I am) please stop helping them doing their job by spooking people who get tickets. They just need to follow the advice in my link.

I don't think I am spooking anyone, and for clarity I  thoroughly agree that anyone in this situation should follow the link either to the MSE page or the pepipoo forums to get reliable advice on hour to beat the PPCs.

Where have I said that the SCC would award against someone who has proof of legitimate use? I don't know if that's been tested in the SCC or not.

What I have said is that if you appeal to the PPC, on grounds of legitimate use, they'll generally refuse you. If you then go to PoPLA and try the same argument, you'll lose again. Then the PPC will double their claim. Still doesn't make it enforceable without a SCC judgement, just means you've thrown away the simplest method of making the problem go away.

wow 3 dislikes for one word ...

I forgot to enter my reg last week and had a charge notice through today.  I phoned The Foundry and the helpful chap I spoke to said I can e-mail them (wall@foundryclimbing.com) with the PCN number on the letter, my car reg, name, Foundry reg no. and (I assume) the date/time I was there, and they can cancel the charge.  My fault to be fair, but I'm glad they can fix it.  There might not have been a space if the system wasn't in place.

That's interesting - their website explicitly says they cannot get pcns cancelled as they are not the landowner. Either the website is telling porkies or the person you spoke to is mistaken. I hope it works out!

As a matter of interest, which PPC are they using?

Or they have a very limited quota of tickets they can cancel per week/month/whatever and when they're gone they're gone.  Not uncommon, I believe, in the contracts with these kinds of enforcement companies.  It strikes me as a bit of a deal with the devil.  

Update 31/01/2019

I phoned The Foundry this evening and the chap I spoke to said they've had a load of requests from people in the same situation, during a sort of grace period from the car parking company.  It sounds like they've had a hard time dealing with all the requests for cancellations.  Essentially they may (or may not) be able to cancel my charge as they've already drawn out the grace period for as long as possible, and they won't be able to cancel any parking charges from this week onwards.

It seems quite a severe solution to what I'm told was a severe problem, and in fairness they have a massive sign up about it by the front door.