IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including QR codes, number plates and reference numbers.
Meadowhall shopping centre POPLA Appeal CPPlus
Pinklady0805
Posts: 97 Forumite
Hi, can someone give me more advice please ?????
The situation that myself and many of my work colleagues have found ourselves in, is regarding private land, parking tickets.
We all work in Meadowhall shopping centre.
Some time ago there was signs put up in the (non paying and no time limit) customer car parks. The signs stating on duty staff members were no longer permitted to park in the shopping centre car parks, we are to park on waste land that is separate from the actual shopping centre.
Signs read as follows.....
This car park is private land and is for the use of Meadowhall shopping centre customers only
No parking for on duty staff members, contractors or park and ride users.
Parking terms and conditions
You agree to pay a parking charge of £80 if you....
-park in a non designated area
-park outside of the marked bays
-park in these areas as an on duty staff member
-park causing an obstruction to other uses
-park in a parent and child bay without a child under 5 accompanying you
-park in a value badge bay without displaying a valid blue badge in conjunction with the blue badge scheme
-use the car park for any other reason other than shopping in Meadowhall shopping centre
-park your vehicle and leave the site by other means
The area that they designated us is not big enough for all the staff members to actually get a space and the area used is a good 15 minute walk away. The area is dark and not seen as a safe area for us to be walking to and from alone. There as been incidences in this area of Women/girls getting approached by strange men, vehicle's getting damaged and staff members injured due to trips and falls on the rubble surface of the car park.
Due to this many of us have ended up parking in the shopping centre carparks, resulting in CPPlus giving us PNC Notices.
We are all now facing unpaid parking ticket chargers for sums of £120 up to £18,000+
I have read through the newbies thread and started my first appeal.
I appealed to CPPlus they refused to drop the charge but sent me a POPLA code.
PNC Date of issue 27/05/2017
Date of sending notice 13/07/2017
Reason 7 - parked in a restricted area
Charge £80 now risen to £120
I am heading in the right direction with something like this as my POPLA Appeal? ....
Dear sir madam
As the registered keeper I appeal on the following grounds
Cp plus's parking charge notice is not compliant with the protection of freedoms act 2012 (POFA) due to the date and the wording used. Under schedule 4, paragraph 4 of the POFA, an operator can only establish the right to receive any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of a vehicle if certain conditions be met as stated in paragraph 5, 6, 11 and 12. CPPlus have failed to fulfil the conditions which state than an operator must have provided the keeper with a notice of keeper (NTK) in accordance with paragraph 9, which stipulates as mandatory, a set time line and wording :-
The notice must be given by—
(a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
The applicable section here is (b) because the Parking Charge Notice/NTK that I have received was delivered by post. Furthermore, paragraph 9(5) states:
’’The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended’’
The Parking Charge Notice sent to myself as Registered Keeper was produced in their offices showing a purported ‘date issued’ which was already past the 14 days by which, under statute, it had to be in my hands/served. Even if they had posted it that day it would be impossible for the notice to have been delivered within the 'relevant period' as required under paragraph 9(4)(b).
In fact, this NTK arrived At lease 47 days after the alleged event. This means that CP Plus have failed to act within the 14 day relevant period. Furthermore, it is clear that CP Plus know this because they have made no reference to ‘keeper liability’ or the POFA.
So, this is a charge that could only be potentially enforced against a known driver and there is no evidence of who that individual was, which brings me to my next point below.
4. The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge
In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon, POPLA must first consider whether they are confident that the Assessor knows who the driver is, based on the evidence received. No presumption can be made about liability whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person.
In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay. I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be), and as there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, it has been held by POPLA on numerous occasions, that a parking charge cannot be enforced against a keeper without a valid NTK.
As the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4. This applies regardless of when the first appeal was made and regardless of whether a purported 'NTK' was served or not, because the fact remains I am only appealing as the keeper and ONLY Schedule 4 of the POFA (or evidence of who was driving) can cause a keeper appellant to be deemed to be the liable party.
The burden of proof rests with the Operator to show that (as an individual) I have personally not complied with terms in place on the land and show that I am personally liable for their parking charge. They cannot.
Furthermore, the vital matter of full compliance with the POFA was confirmed by parking law expert barrister, Henry Greenslade, the previous POPLA Lead Adjudicator, in 2015:
Understanding keeper liability
“There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.
There is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver, does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a keeper sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver. [...] If {POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is} not complied with then keeper liability does not generally pass.''
Therefore, no lawful right exists to pursue unpaid parking charges from myself as keeper of the vehicle, where an operator cannot transfer the liability for the charge using the POFA.
This exact finding was made in 6061796103 against ParkingEye in September 2016.
Not sure about what else if anyone can suggest where I should look.
Many thanks p
The situation that myself and many of my work colleagues have found ourselves in, is regarding private land, parking tickets.
We all work in Meadowhall shopping centre.
Some time ago there was signs put up in the (non paying and no time limit) customer car parks. The signs stating on duty staff members were no longer permitted to park in the shopping centre car parks, we are to park on waste land that is separate from the actual shopping centre.
Signs read as follows.....
This car park is private land and is for the use of Meadowhall shopping centre customers only
No parking for on duty staff members, contractors or park and ride users.
Parking terms and conditions
You agree to pay a parking charge of £80 if you....
-park in a non designated area
-park outside of the marked bays
-park in these areas as an on duty staff member
-park causing an obstruction to other uses
-park in a parent and child bay without a child under 5 accompanying you
-park in a value badge bay without displaying a valid blue badge in conjunction with the blue badge scheme
-use the car park for any other reason other than shopping in Meadowhall shopping centre
-park your vehicle and leave the site by other means
The area that they designated us is not big enough for all the staff members to actually get a space and the area used is a good 15 minute walk away. The area is dark and not seen as a safe area for us to be walking to and from alone. There as been incidences in this area of Women/girls getting approached by strange men, vehicle's getting damaged and staff members injured due to trips and falls on the rubble surface of the car park.
Due to this many of us have ended up parking in the shopping centre carparks, resulting in CPPlus giving us PNC Notices.
We are all now facing unpaid parking ticket chargers for sums of £120 up to £18,000+
I have read through the newbies thread and started my first appeal.
I appealed to CPPlus they refused to drop the charge but sent me a POPLA code.
PNC Date of issue 27/05/2017
Date of sending notice 13/07/2017
Reason 7 - parked in a restricted area
Charge £80 now risen to £120
I am heading in the right direction with something like this as my POPLA Appeal? ....
Dear sir madam
As the registered keeper I appeal on the following grounds
Cp plus's parking charge notice is not compliant with the protection of freedoms act 2012 (POFA) due to the date and the wording used. Under schedule 4, paragraph 4 of the POFA, an operator can only establish the right to receive any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of a vehicle if certain conditions be met as stated in paragraph 5, 6, 11 and 12. CPPlus have failed to fulfil the conditions which state than an operator must have provided the keeper with a notice of keeper (NTK) in accordance with paragraph 9, which stipulates as mandatory, a set time line and wording :-
The notice must be given by—
(a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
The applicable section here is (b) because the Parking Charge Notice/NTK that I have received was delivered by post. Furthermore, paragraph 9(5) states:
’’The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended’’
The Parking Charge Notice sent to myself as Registered Keeper was produced in their offices showing a purported ‘date issued’ which was already past the 14 days by which, under statute, it had to be in my hands/served. Even if they had posted it that day it would be impossible for the notice to have been delivered within the 'relevant period' as required under paragraph 9(4)(b).
In fact, this NTK arrived At lease 47 days after the alleged event. This means that CP Plus have failed to act within the 14 day relevant period. Furthermore, it is clear that CP Plus know this because they have made no reference to ‘keeper liability’ or the POFA.
So, this is a charge that could only be potentially enforced against a known driver and there is no evidence of who that individual was, which brings me to my next point below.
4. The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge
In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon, POPLA must first consider whether they are confident that the Assessor knows who the driver is, based on the evidence received. No presumption can be made about liability whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person.
In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay. I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be), and as there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, it has been held by POPLA on numerous occasions, that a parking charge cannot be enforced against a keeper without a valid NTK.
As the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4. This applies regardless of when the first appeal was made and regardless of whether a purported 'NTK' was served or not, because the fact remains I am only appealing as the keeper and ONLY Schedule 4 of the POFA (or evidence of who was driving) can cause a keeper appellant to be deemed to be the liable party.
The burden of proof rests with the Operator to show that (as an individual) I have personally not complied with terms in place on the land and show that I am personally liable for their parking charge. They cannot.
Furthermore, the vital matter of full compliance with the POFA was confirmed by parking law expert barrister, Henry Greenslade, the previous POPLA Lead Adjudicator, in 2015:
Understanding keeper liability
“There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.
There is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver, does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a keeper sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver. [...] If {POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is} not complied with then keeper liability does not generally pass.''
Therefore, no lawful right exists to pursue unpaid parking charges from myself as keeper of the vehicle, where an operator cannot transfer the liability for the charge using the POFA.
This exact finding was made in 6061796103 against ParkingEye in September 2016.
Not sure about what else if anyone can suggest where I should look.
Many thanks p
0
Comments
-
This scam is outrageous and up there as one of the worst along with the ones on staff at hospitals.
I've skimmed through your draft POPLA appeal and will have a good look at it later.
Was your vehicle given a windscreen ticket or did you just receive a PCN through the post as registered keeper. Do CP Plus say they are relying on POFA.
Due to the sheer number of PCN's issued to staff, circa 150 if I'm correct, this needs to be a joint effort by all involved to get these absurd PCN's killed.
What have your employers had to say about this?
It would be useful if you could scan and put up a copy of the PCN on here, with anything that might identify you blocked out i.e. name, address, vehicle re no., PCN number.0 -
Hi thanks for your reply,
I was issued a window screen ticket. First off they where hand written then they went to machine print out. I then received the notice to keep letter weeks later.
This is the email I got after I had appealed to CPPlus ....
Thank you for your email regarding the above Parking Charge Notice (PCN).
I have carefully reviewed the case and have considered the points that you raised. Unfortunately, I cannot cancel the PCN and it is still payable. I have explained my findings in more detail below.
My findings
The site in question is subject to terms and conditions, which are stated on signs throughout the area. As these terms were breached on the date in question, a PCN was correctly and legitimately issued.
Please be aware that this vehicle was parked within a restricted area.
What you need to do now
You now have three options to choose from:
1) Pay the PCN at the prevailing sum of £120.00 by 22/08/2017. Payment can be made online or by phone. Go to https://www.parkingcsl.co.uk or phone 0208 528 4122. You can find full details of how to pay on the PCN issued to the vehicle and/or on the letter(s) sent if applicable.
2) Make an appeal to POPLA (Independent Appeals Service) by appealing online at https://www.popla.co.uk (verification code: ). The only grounds for making an appeal are stated on the website and to be considered the appeal must be received by POPLA within 28 days of the date of this correspondence. Please note that if you opt to appeal to POPLA and the appeal is unsuccessful you will be only able to settle the PCN at the full amount of £120.00.
3) If you choose to not make payment or appeal, the amount outstanding may be sought via a debt recovery company and/or court action where further costs may be incurred as a result.
More Information
By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services (https://www.ombudsman-services.org) provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution service. As such, should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA, as explained above.
Payment Methods
Online Payment: https://www.parkingcsl.co.uk
Telephone Payment: 0208 528 4122
Bank Transfer: Quote your reference number to Parking Collection Services, Royal Bank Of Scotland, Sort Code 16-00-01, Account Number 20973851
Cheques/Postal Orders: Should be posted to the address below, made payable to Parking Collection Services. Please write your reference number on the back.
Kind Regards
I don't have any of the actual PNC now, I've thrown them all away like a fool ☹️
I don't know actually how many tickets I've got!
I'm telling everyone to log on here, there's just some many of us.
I'm helping the older ladies the best I can as some have no idea how to use the internet, they don't stand a chance on there own.
Our employer enforce it!! Although most managers have got tickets themselves
The centre will not have contact with any staff members only with store managers regarding tickets.
The older ladies and some ill workers were able to apply for a 3 month dispensation pass so they Could park in the customer car parks, if they got a letter from the doctor.
Meadowhall have stopped this now, you are only excempt if you are a blue badge holder.
People have paid £30 for doctors letters and now there refusing to except them.0 -
Wow, this seems a right mess. First edit your post to remove the POPLA verification number.0
-
Oop's done it!! yes most definitely ��0
-
It seems the last PCN was delivered within the time limits.
When a Notice to Driver (windscreen ticket) is given the PPC then have to give a Notice to Keeper (PCN) to the keeper anytime between 28 days and 56 days from the day after the parking event.
In your appeal to CP Plus did you appeal as the driver or registered keeper? Rule no.1 in any appeal to a Private Parking Company is never say you were the driver.
How far do your PCN's go back in time, have you had any letters from debt collection agencies at all?
Do staff have to display a permit in their vehicle for the staff car park? I'm wondering how the goons from CP Plus know a vehicle among the hundreds in the car park belongs to an employee of one of the businesses in the centre. Is it that they are watching you park up and checking your car reg. numbers against a list.0 -
Oh no I didn't realise it went up to 56 days I thought it was 28.
So far I've got them form 31st Jan 17 - may 2017.
I've got 5 cpp NTK letters
9 DRC letters
1 zenith letter
2 girls have just had the LBCC Letters for court, they will owe about £18,000 if they lose ��
Yes they walk around with a4 sheets of paper with all the workers reg plates on and checks them against that, I've seen them do it.
I left my car once while pick up an order in store I was gone 20 mins max and I got a ticket. He was doing it as I returned but said because it was on my window now I had to take it up with cpp.
No we don't have to display permits or anything. We registered our vehicle reg plates with MH So we could access staff car parks as they used ampr cameras for the Barriers to let you in. But yeah you openly see them sat watching staff arrive.0 -
I appealed as NTK not driver0
-
You can only appeal as Keeper, not "NTK"
28 days is none of the limits, but a minuimum. You need to look at POFA2012 Schedule 4 Paragraph 8, as 8 deals with windscreen tickets. Go through the REST of para 8 and ensure that ALL elements are there. If the vehicle was parked in a normal section of the carpark, then it was NOT in a restricted area.
How do they know they are staff member VRMs? This is PII and cannot be given to another company without the subjects consent.0 -
Registered keeper I appealed as.
I sent cp the blue template off the newbies thread? Is that right?
Oh I'm getting so confused, I've read that much I don't what I'm doing again now.0 -
All the tickets you have that are now subject to DRP involvement are beyond any appeal procedure. Unless you can get a landowner cancellation (which, from what you say, is unlikely), you just have to ride those out and see if CPP issue court proceedings, which can be defended with help from here.
The ticket you refer to for which you seem to have a current POPLA code should be appealed to POPLA. Use the templates from post #4 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky as your starting point. Put your effort into getting this POPLA appeal right, then should it be successful, it will be very useful evidence to present to the court should your other tickets end up there.
Whilst the advice we are giving to you here is exclusively about your tickets, that advice might not necessarily be wholly applicable to anyone else involved. They would need to open their own thread for specific advice.
I would however comment on those who have potentially £18,000 charges stacking up against them. They seriously need to take legal advice if court cases are brought against them. They should set up a small group to start to plan contingencies at this stage, as I can't see any money-hungry PPC missing the opportunity of having a grab at 18 grand. And at that level they would for sure hire top legal assistance.
Just look at the Cardiff Hospital case where a similar situation occurred.Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case Defences/Witness Statements, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask. .
I provide only my personal opinion, it is not a legal opinion, it is simply a personal one. I am not a lawyer.
Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.Private Parking Firms - Killing the High Street0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards