Forum Topic

It’s now been over a year since I received a parking violation notice from Park Direct which I chose to ignore, largely due to advice from this forum. I thought, therefore, for the benefit of others in the future I’d update.Having originally written to Park Direct pleading my case in vain, the last rejection letter I received from them was dated 22/02/13 demanding a £100 fine by 22/03/13 or my case would be handed to debt collection agencies. Ignoring this I have indeed subsequently received letters from two outfits, initially Debt Recovery Plus on 12/06/13, with follow up letter dated 27/06, and more recently from Zenith Collections on 14/11/13, with follow up on 25/11. Debt Recovery had raised the fine to £149, stating in their 27/06 letter that if I didn’t pay by 11/07 the case would be passed to the “creditor’s solicitor to commence court proceedings”. The letters from Zenith also claimed £149 but generously gave an option to pay a “reduced settlement” of £80, this with a fourteen day cut-off. Their follow up letter of 25/11 also offered the reduced rate if paid within seven days, otherwise “this matter will be passed to our legal dept with the recommendation that legal proceedings are commenced to recover this amount” (the full £149). It then outlined the likely additional expenses incurred should legal proceedings occur.Obviously I’ve continued to ignore this and will update the forum should anything worthwhile materialize.Nowadays every time we walk past Ealing Broadway we look out for the girl with her mobile phone and there’s nearly always a Park Direct car there, sometimes two. Clearly a very lucrative happy hunting ground for them and I suspect the girl who snaps people is probably on a commission arrangement.

Chris Bennett ● 4475d

For those who have lived here for decades, This forecourt at Ealing Broadway Station has long been a problem.It was intended as a cab rank and drop off but that failed as Taxis had to make a long diversion when the road became one way.But for a long time the reserved spaces were clearly marked and as others have pointed out had a bollard which could only be used by the keyholder.But it is now poorly signed and spaces seem to be occupied by the vehicles of private parking operatives.However, what is not clear to me. Did the original entry enter a parking bay or remain on the slip road?As a lot of authorities are now finding. Proving a contravention by CCTV when a driver is still at the wheel of a vehicle is a very sticky wicket.It is not illegal to allow a passenger to alight from a vehicle on an uncatagorised road ie. not a motorway or urban clearway.  If the road has public access. It must otherwise be clearly marked 'No Stopping' etc.I also have to take issue with the Photography issue mentioned.I'm afraid to say Michael is almost bang on the money. In the UK anywhere the public go unrestricted, so can a camera be it private or public domain.There are exceptions but outdoors it is pretty much anywhere.The TFL reference only refers to commercial photography and as pointed out the only general exception they have applies to flash photography.Only H&S requirements apply and permission is only a matter of courtesy.It does not bear relation to non commercial photographers, photojournalists and amateur photographers.As has been widely reported in the Railway and National press, Both Network Rail, the Police and Train Operators have all been told to stop unlawfully harrasing photographers, amateur or professional.Most Professional photographers are now fully aware of their rights and legal situations and many now carry a printed edict from the Association of Chief Constables which quotes both policy and the law.Many organisations constantly try to impose 'laws' that do not exist. Anyone can photograph the GSK building as long as you outside the boundary of the site. Permission is often sought as a matter of courtesy and to allay any suspicious concerns. In any case, anyone with a mobile phone can now take images covertly.I won't go into any more detail it gets boring and complex, but I specialise in copyright and media access issues mainly for photographers and have a full time media lawyer as a business partner. We get endless issues like this. In 10 years we have yet to go to court as all just try it on and back off at the last minute.I think you are confusing this with trespass laws.

Oliver Gregan ● 4656d

That is not correct either. You are only in the care of Network rail or London Underground when you are in possession of a valid ticket or have validated your permit to travel.The forecourt is not restricted and has full public access. It is thus a public place.Only private property has restrictions. Shops can close their doors and so can the station. But the footways are not restricted and have full public access. No-one has the right to restrict anyone regardless who the owner might be.The carry on at the forecourt of Ealing Broadway is a scam.  When the spaces where used by occupants, there were barriers. Now there are just a few and it looks like a drop off zone ( which is what it should be) I'm told it was originally a cab rank but it was too far forward for the majority of fares which wanted to go in Castlebar/Hangar Hill direction.If the spaces are so inconvenienced then why no space barriers?  Cheap and effective and prevent anyone parking other than the keyholder.In the UK anywhere where the public can move unrestricted is deemed a public place. Even if the land belongs to a corporation or an individual.If an owner wishes to impose restrictions they have to clearly mark, corden and sin the areas concerned.Most would be in breach of the terms of planning permission for the site as public access is usually incorporated in the application or conditions of approval.This includes shopping centres and suchlike. Even though their managements try to ban photography per say. There are NO laws banning such. But this does not stop photographers being intimidated.Again the Police have tried to restrict photographers even working media using everything from Health and safety to anti terror laws. It has been made very clear to them on more than one occasion by the Home Office that this is not lawful.Nor are there any restrictions on photography or video in this country.Again, anywhere in the public domain you can take photographs whether others like it or not. Anywhere where there are restrictions has to be clearly signed.The only place this is not the case is on private property which does not allow public access and inside private premises. Including through windows.Anywhere else has to provide clear signage to the contrary.LUL only charge for commercial photography and filming and that is only for the supply of staff or special arrangements. Only flash photography is restricted and this is clearly indicated.

Michael Brandt ● 4656d

The first few posts in this thread set the tone - which has now been forgotten.It would appear not to be illegal to park in these bays, depending on your definition of the word (e.g. not enforceable in court) but also not illegal for the bays' owner to send letters threatening non-existent court proceedings etc.Based on personal experience and observation:- these bays are not used as parking spaces by any persons or organisations, they currently exist only so that motorists park in them, are photographed and then sent notices demanding money- the notices purport to be fines - they are very carefully crafted to look nearly identical to local authority Penalty Charge Notices- the notices claim that a large fine is due and that this is enforceable in court if not paid within a short period- this would appear to be a lie.  Advice on this forum and on several others is that one cannot legally be fined for parking in the bays.  However, the owner can demand payment for the time spent parked there - e.g. 5 minutes at £6 per hour = £0.50p.  To my knowledge, this is never explained to drivers nor are these small amounts ever claimed nor accepted by the bay owner- the reason I believe the owner's letters demanding fines to be untruthful is that no court has ever enforced one, despite many hundreds of thousands of such letters having been issued by similar companies around England and Wales- the owner commissions solicitors or similar to write a stream of strongly worded letters to the motorist demanding that the "fine" be paid and escalating the amount that will be recoverable should the payment not be paid immediately.  If a telephone number can be found, repeated calls are made to the motorist threatening court proceedings- motorists who ask for the owner to take them to court are ignored- after a few months, the solicitor abandons the case as it is unenforceable and moves on to the next motorist.Neither party is exactly in the right - I guess personal judgement on the morality of the situation depends on whether one is a motorist or a bay owner.

Phil Kay ● 4656d

That's your way of looking at it, Asha, but not mine. To be quite honest I find your absolute strictly by the rules attitude depressing. I guess you've never gone 21mph in a 20 zone or over 70 on the motorway either, and never broken any minor rules knowingly in your life. To me this incident is all about proportion, and if you took the time to read earlier posts of mine, my objection is to the way Park Direct operate. I've been driving for over 35 years now and in all that time only once before had a parking ticket - and that was outside my own house soon after the residential parking came into operation and I neglected to put a temporary permit in the window of my car. I challenged that too but, in my view unfairly, lost, so in that case I paid up - to park outside my own house. I state this to demonstrate that I park sensibly, not irresponsibly.There is absolutely no comparison between the parking bays outside Ealing Broadway station and a private house, and its truly ridiculous to draw such an analogy. My circumstances are that I parked in one of the bays at about 21.50 in the evening last December to collect my daughter from a Guides trip. I would've walked but it was pouring with rain. The bays were all but empty and I caused no disruption nor inconvenience and DID NOT LEAVE THE CAR to go shopping etc! Two months later I got through the post a claim for a parking charge with a picture of my car taken by a mobile phone. Since then I understand that Park Direct employ people to stand in front of the station to purposefully do this. My objection is that if they had asked me to move I would've done so, but they didn't, they just view it as a money making business opportunity. I know rigid people like you, Asha, will never see it from my perspective and continue to preach about law breakers like me and, to be honest, I neither have the time nor patience to argue it here beyond this message.

Chris Bennett ● 4656d

Hi. I also am potentially in conflict with Park Direct.At around 21.50 on 7th December last year I parked for a few minutes in one of the bays waiting to collect my daughter from the tube as she had been on a Guides trip into London. I only drove to collect her as it was pouring with rain. I know the bays say "no parking" but they were virtually empty at that time and I caused no disruption nor left the car.Two months later on 7th February 2013 out of the blue I received a "parking charge notice" from Park Direct. It took me a while to remember the event as it was so long in the past!Anyway, having found some advice elsewhere on the net I wrote to Park Direct saying this was both unenforceable and unreasonable as I was neither parked for long nor causing concern or disruption. I also said I felt it totally unreasonable to write a full two months after the event.Predictably I received a response on Monday saying I still owed the money and had 14 days from date to pay or it would increase from £60 to £100 etc, etc. I must admit to avoid the stress and worry I was considering paying but having found other info on the net including this forum saying ignore it I'm inclined to do just that.Its not just the money but fact that it took them two months to send out the notice which really annoys me. I do wonder whether this is done deliberately so that events aren't clear in one's mind given the time elapsed.Anyway, if anyone has any up-to-date thoughts on how things stand with Park Direct claims and threats I'd appreciate hearing them. Thanks

Chris Bennett ● 4781d

You might be interested in an article with the heading:LIES OF THE COWBOYS in the Daily Mail 15/9/09 by reporters Ryan Kisiel and Chrisiian Gysin.Car-park gangs who dupe the motorist, doctor the facts, and send a bill for £150.A Daily Mail investigation has exposed the underhand tacticics used by a wheel clamping firm to hammer motorists with fines totalling thousands of pounds each day.It photographed cars parking for less than a minute in restricted bays and later claimed that they were there for much longer before demanding huge charges.The activities of Park Direct. no doubt mirrored by unscrupulous operators on private land throughout England and Wales, provide further ammunition for the Daily Mail's demand for a law to crack down on cowboy clampers.As part of its widespread operation the firm monitors a dozen private parking bays for businesses outside Ealing Broadway Railway Station in West London.As cars enter a side road to drop off friends and relatives, a sign warning that the car park opposite is only for private businesses has been covered with white paper.It is not until they pull into a bay and get out of the car that they see a much smaller sign on the wall in front of their car warning that parking enforcement is in action. By the time they realise their mistake and leave the bay they have been secretly photographed.Wearing a black bomber jacket and trousers, a young female worker stands by the row of shops next to the station from 7am to 7pm and takes pictures on a digital camera.After capturing 'evidence' - and earning what is understood to be a £30 commission fee for each vehicle - she is often seen smiling and even dancing in celebration.Having been warned about Park Direct's activities, a Daily Mail reporter drove into one of the parking bays at 11.47an on July 29. As would an unsuspecting member of the public, he left his car but then saw the small sign, got back in and reversed out of the bay.In all, it took 32 seconds. But his car had already been photographed - even though Park Direct agreed with the local council, following complaints, that it would offer drivers a two-minute 'grace period' to realise their mistake. Ten minutes later - at 11.57am - he returned and went through the same routine, this time taking 31 seconds. Again he was photographed.During the day at no period did the female clamper reveal the Security Industry Association badge identification on her arm as required to by the Private Security Industry Act 2001.A logo - possibly of Park Direct - was printed on the girl's jacket but was hidden by her lapel.Six weeks later Park Diret sent a notice demanding £150 for 'stopping or waiting on private land where stopping or waiting restrictions are in force'.It produced photographs claiming to show that the car had been in the same parking space for ten minutes - although it was in a different position in the two pictures, and parked next to different cars,Dozens of other motorists have been hit with the huge fines - even though some were sent pictures showing their reverse light on, proving that they were merely waiting to let other vehicles pass before leaving the bay.The company received the vehicle owner's home details from DVLA officials after supplying the registration number, It is legally allowed to do this because it i registered with the regulatory body, the Security Industry Authority. The temptation for its victims is to refuse to pay. But the risk is that the clampers will then take the driver to county court to recover the money. They will also seek hefty costs. So what begins as a £150 bill can quickly soar to many thousands.It can swiftly escalate to the point where bailiffs sieze possessions from a home - at a fraction of their true value - the meet the huge outstanding 'debt'.The driver could also find his financial reputation demolished. A county-court judgement lodged with any of the main computerised credit reating companies will severely affect the ability to secure a mortgage, borrow money, or be granted a credit card, as banks will refuse to lend to what they now consider a 'high risk' customer.Consumer experts urge motorists to pay up first and seek redress later - no matter how aggrieved they feel.At Ealing Broadway, a team of three clampers also wait outside the station trapping unwitting drivers who are dropping off friends and family - forcing them to pay a £60 release fee.A minibus dropping off soldiers at the station was clamped only 12 seconds after it parked in one of the bays with most of the servicemen still sitting inside the vehicle.Another man who was picking up a season ticket from the station and left his car for no more than a minute and a half was clamped while his wife and two young children were still inside,.The Mail's evidence has now been handed over to Ealing Trading Standards officers, who have launched an investigation. Their head, Mark Wiltshire, said: 'We would like to thank the Daily Mail for the file of evidence they have handed over to us and we will investigate whether any offences have been committed.'Park Direct is based in Uxbridge Road, West London, and is owned by an Australian, Abraham Saliba.It was set up in 2004 and counts Barclays, Esso and Texaco petrol stations as its biggest clients. It does not charge the landowners for its service, making money from clamp release fees and fines.Yesterday, when Mr Saliba was confronted with the Daily Mail's evidence, he first claimed that the pictures showing our car in two separate bays had been caused by a 'malfunction and misprint on our camera system.'He then said that Park Direct had an 'appeals system' but in the circumstances his company would not pursue the £150 fine.Thirty minutes later he clled the Daily Mail and claimed the ticket had been issued 'by mistake' and should have been sent to the owner of a black Mazda vehicle parked next to the Mail's car.He added: I have got the story straight now.'I am not a driver but I am sure this article would be of great interest to all the people who have been fined for parking at Ealing Broadway Station.

Jean F Fernandez ● 6040d