Author Topic: Man hit with £100 charge for parking on airport road – in Scunthorpe!  (Read 8267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Web Admin

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 908
Man hit with £100 charge for parking on airport road – in Scunthorpe!


Lost appeal: Geoff Roebuck who has been charged £100 for stopping on the approach road to the Old Farmhouse

A MAN who claims he was unfairly hit with a parking charge in Scunthorpe was told he had lost his appeal because he did not adhere to the conditions of use for "an airport private access road".

Geoff Roebuck, 59, of Scotter, has been left baffled by the response as the nearest airport to where his vehicle stopped is 20 miles away at Kirmington.

Explaining the situation, he said he had spent the morning reading his paper in the Old Farmhouse pub off Doncaster Road when his friend came to collect him in Mr Roebuck's car.

Mr Roebuck said he walked to the entrance of the pub car park and when he saw his friend he indicated for him to stop.

He and the friend were photographed standing outside the car "for seconds" on a private road before they drove off, he said.

He then got a letter demanding £100 or £60 if paid within 14 days from Sheffield-based private car parking company Vehicle Control Services Ltd (VCS).

After appealing the charge, he was told by the company he had to stump up the cash.

Informing him his appeal had failed, a letter from VCS said it was "entirely the motorist's responsibility to ensure they adhere to the terms and conditions of use for the airport's private access road".

It continued: "The roadway in question is part of a high security zone and as such motorists are clearly advised not to park, stop or wait.

"Such actions may also pose an obstruction or danger to other road users."

Mr Roebuck, who is retired, said: "I left the pub and walked to the car park entrance. The car came past and I signalled for them to pull up.

"My friend got out and we stood for a matter of seconds at the side of the car.

"It was a great surprise and shock to receive a £100 invoice for breaking a contract I knew nothing about.

"In hindsight I should have waited in the Farmhouse car park and not walked to the road."

He added: "It must be the longest airport access road in the world with Humberside airport 20 miles away."

Mr Roebuck will now appeal to the Independent Parking Committee.

Vehicle Control Ltd was unavailable for comment.


http://www.scunthorpetelegraph.co.uk/Man-hit-100-charge-parking-airport-road-8211/story-26338864-detail/story.html

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
If the IPC Ltd's kangaroo court, the IAS, uphold this one it'll prove what many of us have suspected for a long time - that they are not fit for purpose and should have their ATA Status revoked immediatley.

Offline Overlord

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 208
This is absolutely ridiculous. There is no way in any stretch of imagination, that this road could be called an airport access road. It is impossible to get to any airport, existing or imagined along this road. The road in which the Old Farmhouse pub stands is a dead end and is miles away from any airport, Humberside included. This is definitely a phishing expedition and should be contested in the strongest possible way. Mr Reobuck, they are just after your <cash>

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Sadly, I suspect this bloke will be bushwhacked. The airport angle is a red herring to divert his attention from the killer appeal points. He'll protest that the Antonov An-225 can make the airport in less than 20 miles whilst VCS will simply produce their signage along with the assertion that a binding contract applies on that road and the rest is history. Bada bing, bada boom.

Private appeals work a whole lot differently to statutory ones and not just because of the contract angle. The general advice from experienced appellants is not to bother at all with what actually happened but to concentrate on winning rebuttals of known arguments like GPEOL, signage, locus standi, etc. Private weasels routinely reject all appeals so the initial appeal to them will be a simple dispute of the allegation, being careful not to admit to being the driver.

"Your sPeCulative iNvoice along with the allegations mentioned are hotly contested. You may cancel the charge and all associated action or provide an IPC(I nearly said POPLA then, D'oh!) appeal code along with your rejection." That's it. That's all that's needed.

"I was unaware of any restriction when I parked" is the wrong way to go. Your position is instantly weakened because you have now admitted to being the driver.

Of course when you have done a few you will simply tell them to f :o ck off.

:-ev-:

Incidentally, here's the Antonov at Gatwick, preparing to transport Patrick Trouser-Fire's massive ego up to the NEC,

Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Offline scalyback

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 325
1) They belong to an ATA for parking not stopping, why are the DVLA selling keeper details?

2) The airport land is subject to byelaws which should not be superseded by the parking company, so why are the DVLA selling keeper details?

3) The ploy of trespass does not apply if the landowner has invited you onto private land in order to carry out business operations (Use the airport).

Didn't we have a byelaw topic concerning a harbour a while ago?

"Damn good kicking!"

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
1) VCS Ltd satisfy the DVLA's strict criteria for the release of keeper details, i.e. they have £2.50.
2) Please refer to 1)
3) Correct. Also, trespass can only be pursued by the landowner.

I can't find a bylaw topic on here but I did find Pranky's blogpost,
http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/popla-decree-parkingeye-are-incorrectly.html
Airport roads are also subject to bylaws but the numbers game is still a very profitable business. At least for the time being it is. The Bald Eagle is plotting…………


Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

Offline The Bald Eagle

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 4497
  • THE lowest common denominator
 <baldeagleplotting>

Hover your cursor over the emoticon above.  ;)
WE ARE WATCHING YOU

Offline DastardlyDick

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 1697
I could be wrong but my understanding is that if Airport Bye-Laws are in force then it is not "relevant land" and PoFA - and therefore keeper liability - do not apply. If VCS continue to insist that the vehicle was at whichever airport then this chap (if he can do so honestly) can say "I don't know/cannot remember who was driving my vehicle at the time of the alleged contravention - it could have been Mr A, Mr B, or Mr C".
Job Done.
« Last Edit: 21 April, 2015, 11:46:22 PM by DastardlyDick »

Offline scalyback

  • Follower
  • **
  • Posts: 325
YEAH!

That's the one I was trying to remember, 'Relevant land'

YAY! They would look a bit PoFACED trying to use PoFA on property with byelaws.

Um, How does this hang out with British Rail/network Rail/railtrack/hornby railways carparks?

Offline Ewan Hoosami

  • Administrator
  • Follower
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
  • Veni, Vidi, $chunti. I came, I saw, I assisted.
Appealing to the council is like playing chess with a pigeon. You might be a chess grand master but the pigeon will always knock all the pieces over, shit on the board and then strut around triumphantly.

 


Supporters of the NoToMob

In order to view this object you need Flash Player 9+ support!

Get Adobe Flash player