A number of cases were heard in Cardiff this Friday concerning parking charges issued by New Generation Parking Management (NGPM) at a car park in Curran Road, Cardiff. Several judges were scheduled to take handle the cases, and there were three representatives from LPC law on behalf of the claimant. John Wilkie was present as lay representative/amicus curiae for several of the defendants.
One of the judges had previously been the victim of a parking company and invited the parties to request he recuse himself, which they declined to do.
DJ Philips took on one of these claims (involving multiple tickets) as a test case. The hearing included an outing to the car park in question - around half a mile from the court. Several of the other cases were duly adjourned pending the result of this case.
After hearing the arguments the judge ruled that NGPM had no right to operate on the land, and all PCN's issued and sued for are a nullity. Leave to appeal was refused.
Apparently NGPM have a contract with a landowner who owns the land adjacent to the material location. But the Gym, and its car park, have a different landowner, and the defendants obtained statements from that landowner, and the Gym manager, that they have no contract with NGPM. This together with a copy of the Land Registry entry swung the case decisively in the defendant's favour. It seems that there was some dubious character with a pad of NTDs, who was going round putting them on cars in the Gym car park. This person was not an employee of NGPM.
Motorists who have paid charges to NGPM when they were parked in the Gym car park may therefore have a valid claim against NGPM to get their monies refunded.
Is the ATA system working?
The claims were issued by Wright Hassall, which calls into question their competence to judge the stayed POPLA cases fairly. If they are unaware that operators cannot issue tickets on land where they have no contract, then they are hardly likely to rule correctly on the stayed cases.
At the time the tickets were issued NGPM were members of the British Parking Association. The BPA were informed at the time that NGPM were issuing tickets on land where they had no rights. The BPA asked NGPM if this was true and NGPM replied that it was not. The BPA therefore closed the investigation.
The Prankster thinks this shows the system is failing. The Prankster therefore thinks that responsibility for appeals and enforcement should be independent of the ATA system.
The Parking Prankster