POPLA appeal VCS Liverpool John Lennon Airport JLA

In case it is interested / relevant to anyone this is what VCS sent in thei evidence pack. Accompanying this is loads (and I mean loads) of separate documents including photos from the site, a video of my car, site map, statements from the airport, a GPEOL statement (no breakdown), diagrams of signage, various legal case studies and on and on and on (and bizarrely photos of someone elses car too - I presume from another case!)


Contravention:
[46J] – Stopping on a roadway where stopping is prohibited


Reasons For Issue:
The appellant’s (Mr xxxxxxxxx) vehicle stopped in an area where stopping is prohibited (red route).
The vehicle was observed to be stationary on the airport approach roads, which have been designated as a red route, where stopping is prohibited at any time at 18:18. The position of the appellant’s stationary vehicle is marked on the Site Overhead photograph (in Section F).
A no stopping zone has been introduced on the airport approach roads and the dedicated bus access routes, due to growing congestion caused by vehicles stopping and blocking lanes. The subsequent congestion has created safety risks for other motorists and potential costly delays for emergency vehicles responding to incidents at the airport.
We are employed solely to strictly enforce the Terms and Conditions as per our contract with the landowner. The appellant is observed stopping on a roadway clearly marked as, “RESTRICTED ZONE - No stopping at any time”.

Signage:
There are 46 x highly prominent information signs situated at key locations throughout the area. Photographs confirm that signage can clearly be observed throughout the site.
The appellant will have driven past a minimum of 8 prominent signs, including 2 x Entrance Signs (2000mm x 1000mm) and 6 x Restricted Zone “No Stopping at any time” Mobile CCTV Signs (660mm x 500mm).
Signage has been approved by senior management at the British Parking Association (BPA) and text size is relative to average approach speed of a vehicle on the approach roads; which have a 30mph maximum speed limit.


Summary of Evidence:
1) John Lennon Airport and all its approach roads are private land. Motorists are allowed to enter that land provided that they agree to the Terms and Conditions of entry. In this case the requirement is that they do not stop at any time on those approach roads, where signage states: “Restricted Zone - No stopping at any time”.
2) We have been employed to carry out traffic enforcement against drivers that stop or wait on the private airport approach roads and the dedicated bus access routes. There are large highly prominent signs at the entrance to the airport approach roads and at regular intervals that state: “RESTRICTED ZONE – No Stopping at Any Time – Strictly no parking, stopping or waiting on double yellow lines, red route zones or roadways at any time”.
3) Upon reviewing the video taken from our CCTV vehicle, it is clear that the appellant’s vehicle was stopped where stopping is prohibited and a passenger enters the vehicle. Given the sensitive security issues at airport sites it is not unusual to prohibit stopping of any kind. (See section G).
4) Throughout his correspondence and appeals to both VCS Ltd and POPLA the appellant has failed to name the driver in respect of the Parking Charge Notice and given no explanation for the vehicle stopping, contrary to the advertised Terms and Conditions.
5) Vehicle Control Services Ltd are required to adhere to the requirements as outlined within Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012) in order to lawfully pursue the Registered Keeper for charges relating to breaches of contract should certain criteria be met.
6) The Parking Charge Notice issued to the appellant clearly states, “If, after 28 days from the date of this Parking Charge Notice payment has not been made in full, or we have not been provided with the name and a serviceable address for the driver/hirer, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, we do have the right to recover from the Registered Keeper of the vehicle the amount that remains unpaid”.
7) Under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 by failing to provide those details, the appellant became liable for the Parking Charge Notice.
8) The appellant has submitted both in their appeals to Vehicle Control Services Ltd and to POPLA a document using an internet template, which uses large passages of legal expressions, intended to fit all incidents of parking on private land scenarios. The appellant has purposely created a series of irrelevant questions in order to cause Vehicle Control Services Limited unnecessary inconvenience.
9) The appellant’s vehicle was stopped in an area where stopping is prohibited.
10) The appellant questions signage on the John Lennon approach roads; as established members of the British Parking Association, we adhere to their Code of Practice for Private Enforcement on Private Land and Unregulated Car Parks. This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the car park.
11) Entrance signage states: “Mobile CCTV & Number Plate Recognition Enforcement Cameras in operation”.
12) There are 46 highly prominent information signs situated at key locations throughout the area. Photographs confirm that signage can clearly be observed at the entrance and throughout the site.
13) The appellant will have driven past an absolute minimum of 8 prominent signs, including 2 Entrance Signs and 6 Restricted Zone “No Stopping at any time” Mobile CCTV Signs.
14) Signage on the approach roads is reflective and positioned to face the oncoming motorists and has been approved by senior management at the BPA. Text size is relative to the average approach speed of an approaching vehicle on the approach roads; which have a 30mph maximum speed limit.
15) A helpline telephone number is located on signage to help all motorists who are experiencing difficulties or have any queries. This was not utilised by the appellant.
16) The appellant mistakenly refers to the use of ANPR technology on the airport approach roads and makes reference to a ‘Hidden camera van’. Vehicle Control Services Ltd holds 'Approved Operator Status' (AOS) with the British Parking Association (BPA) and is thus required to strictly comply with the 'Code of Practice for the control and enforcement of parking on private land and unregulated car parks'. All operational vehicles are marked clearly with ANPR Ltd company livery which fully identifies the company.
17) The appellant questions the validity of the PCN issued on the airport approach roads; airport byelaws are not currently in use. The last sets of byelaws relate to the old airport site, and are consequently, regarded as obsolete by the Airport Company.
18) The document referred to by the appellant was not an invoice as stated, but was a Parking Charge Notice which correctly identified the VAT Number and registered company details.
19) Vehicle Control Services Ltd (VCS) vs. HMRC, we refer to paragraph 46 of the decision where it stated: “VCS is permitted under contract [with the landowner] to collect and retain all fees and charges from parking enforcement action”. The VCS vs. HMRC case was won by VCS on appeal and Vehicle Control Services Ltd do have the relevant authority.
20) The appellant also questions the rights of Vehicle Control Services Ltd to issue Parking Charge Notices at the John Lennon Airport and requests a copy of the contract with the landowner.
21) A statement of authority signed by the landowner, which states, “The operator is authorised by the landowner to issue Parking Charge Notices where vehicles are parked on the site in a manner not permitted under the Terms and Conditions of parking” and, “The operator is authorised by the landowner to pursue the outstanding parking charges in accordance with the British Parking Association’s Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice”, can be found in Section G and is marked ‘Confidential’. If the POPLA adjudicator requires further information not covered in this document, then it can be produced at a later date on request. This is provided for the sole purpose of evaluation of the information submitted herewith and, in consideration of receipt of this document, the recipient agrees to maintain such information in confidence and not to reproduce or otherwise disclose this information to any person.
22) The appellant also questions his contract with VCS Ltd and asks who the ‘creditor’ is. Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 states: “the creditor” means a person who is for the time being entitled to recover unpaid parking charge notices from the driver of the vehicle. Signage and all correspondence sent to the appellant, clearly identifies VCS Ltd as being responsible for the management and control of the John Lennon approach roads. As previously stated, John Lennon Airport is private land and Vehicle Control Services have been employed to strictly enforce the Terms and Conditions as per a contract with the landowner.
23) In his appeal the appellant states that the parking charge is “Not a genuine pre-estimate of loss”. There is a long and detailed process put in place to enforce Terms & Conditions at a car park or restricted areas/roadways (private land). If we did not enforce breaches of the Terms and Conditions this would lead to a loss of control of the private land, where vehicles park/stop without consideration to others and/or block access routes etc. Without enforcement, motorists may not adhere to the Terms and Conditions which would lead to a loss of revenue, which would not be sustainable for a parking/enforcement operator or an acceptable loss to their clients. Also the operator’s inability to control the site could lead to a failure to keep, for example, allotted disabled bays, available for those in most need of it. If operators cannot regulate the private land, their clients would not require their services and the company would cease to exist. It is therefore commercially justifiable that the operator seeks to enforce its Terms and Conditions.
24) The Parking Charge Notices (PCN’s) that we issue represent a claim for liquidated and ascertained damages in respect of a breach of contract’ which is deemed to have been offered by our signage at the location, and accepted by the motorist, in that he opted to remain. The breach of the stated Terms & Conditions has been proved by other evidence elsewhere in this submission. When a motorist uses the private land and is in breach of the Terms and Conditions of use of the private land, a loss is incurred by us and also impacts on our ability to effectively manage the site.
25) The appellant has not offered any evidence as to why the charge is not a genuine pre estimate of loss; they have simply stated that in their opinion it does. We contend that that the onus is on the motorist to lay out their reasons with supporting evidence as to why the charge is not appropriate. That said we aim to set out our position in the remainder of this document as to why our charges are based on a genuine pre-estimate of the losses incurred by us, due to the breach of the stated terms and conditions. Vehicle Control Services Ltd would draw the adjudicator’s attention to the Parking Operators response to the appellant’s argument, contained in our statement, the accompanying legal arguments and appendices contained within Section G.
26) We would contend that it is too late now for the motorist to indicate that they are unhappy with the parking charge as this should have been done at the time of accepting the contract. When using the private land in question, the motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide by the Terms and Conditions applicable in return for permission to use that land. It is the motorist’s responsibility to ensure that he abides by the advertised Terms and Conditions of that private land. If the motorist was unhappy with the contract terms, they should not have remained or stopped on the land.
27) The amount of our charge has been calculated in advance and is clearly set out on the notices and signage. As such it is accepted on staying or stopping on the private land, and the driver cannot claim that there are any Trading Standards or Consumer Regulation breaches, as they have accepted the conditions at the point of opting to remain or stop on that private land. On accepting the contractual Terms and Conditions, we assert that the appellant cannot now seek to effectively renegotiate them or to dismiss them in their entirety. The charge of £100 reduced to £60 is as advertised and within BPA guidelines (Para. 19.5 of the BPA Code of Practice).
28) We would state that a simple statement from a motorist that in their ‘opinion’, a parking charge is ‘unreasonable, excessive or punitive or not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ is insufficient in itself; the argument needs to be qualified with supporting evidence, as is done by the parking operator. If, in the adjudicator’s opinion, such evidence has not been adequately supplied by either party, then we request that further clarification should be sought, before the case is finally adjudicated upon. In any event, if the adjudicator considers that our pre-estimate of loss calculation is too high, or requires further clarification on any aspect; relevant details should be requested from the operator.
29) We would also highlight to the assessor the following clauses in Schedule 1 of the POPLA Charter which states:
An Assessor or Adjudicator shall consider all of the submissions made by both parties before making a decision on the appeal.
If the Assessor or Adjudicator considers that further evidence is required before a decision can be made then such evidence shall be sought in writing from the relevant party.
30) Press releases from our client, which also appear on the John Lennon Airport website, clarify our position and state:
Drivers are being warned not to stop on the approach road at Liverpool John Lennon Airport (JLA) and other surrounding access roads or they could face a charge of up to £100.
A ‘Red Route’ no stopping zone has already been introduced on the Airport approach road and the dedicated bus access route, due to growing congestion caused by vehicles stopping and blocking lanes. The subsequent congestion has created safety risks for other motorists and potential costly delays for emergency vehicles responding to an incident at the Airport.
"Unfortunately a number of vehicles continue to ignore the restrictions in place, causing congestion problems for the Airport”.
A dedicated vehicle with onboard mobile CCTV and Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) equipment will be monitoring these roads. A specialist company will be providing this service on behalf of the Airport.
High profile signage advising drivers of the consequences of not complying with the highway restrictions have been installed throughout the relevant areas.
The Airport Police Team at JLA added: “Vehicles parked in unauthorised areas can present a risk to airport security and can hamper access of emergency vehicles. Merseyside Police continues to support the airport’s measures implemented to enhance security and safety for the benefits of the travelling public using Liverpool John Lennon Airport”.
Drivers will be able to use an Express Drop Off & Pick Up car park closest to the terminal building with a minimum £2 charge for up to 20 minutes, or use a new drop off and pick up facility which will be free to use for up to 20 minutes. This new car park will be located in one of the long stay car parks, and a 10 min walk from the passenger terminal.
Blue Badge holders will be permitted to park in designated bays for free, for a period of up to 30 minutes in this car park. Badge holders simply take their Blue Badge to the Car Park Kiosk located on the ground floor of the Multi Storey Car Park to obtain a validated exit ticket.
Taxi companies and shuttle bus operators wishing to use the Express Drop Off & Pick Up Car Park can apply for a 50% discount on the fee.
31) A person can enter into a contract either by expressly agreeing to do so or by acting in such a way that he/she can be said to have implied agreement to enter into a contract. Where notice is given to a motorist of the consequences of stopping in a particular area, a motorist enters into a contract with Vehicle Control Services Ltd by implication and accepts the terms set out in the Notice by proceeding to stop.
32) Vehicle Control Services Ltd operates in Common Law under the Laws of Contract and Trespass. It is trite law that a motorist choosing to enter and use private land for authorised uses does so in full and tacit acceptance of the Terms and Conditions in operation. Those Terms and Conditions are in operation from the moment a person enters onto private land. It follows that should the motorist breach the Terms and Conditions or commit a trespass to the land, we are entitled to seek damages from the motorist to the value of the charges as indicated on the signage on site. On the day in question, the appellant’s vehicle was issued with a Parking Charge Notice because it broke this contract; the relevant charge is consequently recoverable under Contract Law.
33) By stopping on a road where stopping was prohibited the appellant as keeper became liable for a Parking Charge Notice under Schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.