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.
POPLA Decisions
Options
Comments
-
I appealed against a parking ticket issued in Adam Street car park Cardiff, and won on the grounds:
"The Operator has not produced any evidence to demonstrate that it is the land-owner; or, that it has the authority of the land-owner to issue parking charge notices at this site."
The appeal and reply can be found at the following thread:
Vinci Popla Appeal - Help Please, Posted in July (I couldn't post the actual link)
0 -
0
-
I won too, I am delighted!
I might go and stick copies of my appeal letter and POPLA decision all over Civil Enforcements Ltd's signs wherever I see them.
Here is my original appeal to Civil Enforcement Ltd, which they of course rejected, and the POPLA decision following my appeal to them:
Appeal
Dear Sirs
re PCN number xxxxxxx
I have received your parking invoice impersonating a 'parking ticket' and will be complaining in the strongest terms to your client since I am no customer of yours and no longer one of theirs, now. No doubt you convinced them that your operation is some sort of 'parking space maximisation scheme' when it is nothing of the sort and is simply there to maximise your own profits.
I decline your invitation to pay or name the driver, neither of which are required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. This is my appeal and all liability to your company is denied on the following basis:
A. The amount is neither a genuine tariff/fee for parking, nor is it based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss.
B. You are not the landowner and do not have locus standi.
C. Your signage was not sufficiently prominent nor clearly worded and consideration did not flow from both parties, so there was no contract.
If you choose not to cancel this invoice you must issue a rejection letter in reply to my appeal, explaining:
1. The legal basis of your charge (i.e. breach, trespass or contractual fee). As keeper, I cannot be expected to guess the basis of your allegation. If you try to rely upon ParkingEye v Beavis at POPLA, I will point out that it was a flawed decision, it is not binding, and it is set for the Court of Appeal. There is clearly no commercial justification for this punitive charge and no case law to support it.
2. Proof of your locus standi to offer contracts to drivers at this site.
3. Your explanation of the consideration that you believe flowed from the driver, and from yourselves.
4. A copy of the signage site map and close-up pictures of the signs in situ at the time, taken at a comparable time of day in similar light conditions.
5. The means to make an appeal to POPLA, otherwise you will be reported to the BPA and the DVLA.
A certificate of posting will be obtained for all my written responses and I intend to claim my costs when I prevail.
Yours faithfully
POPLA decision
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
It is not in dispute that the appellant parked in the car park. The operator
concluded that valid payment had not been made for parking and issued a
parking charge notice.
The appellant made a number of representations, but the only one it is
necessary to deal with is the submission that the operator lacked authority
from the landowner for their activities.
The operator rejected these representations. On the question of authority, the
operator stated that they had authority from the landowner for their activities.
Considering the evidence before me, I find that the operator has not
provided any evidence that they have authority from the landowner to issue
and enforce parking charge notices in respect of the site. The operator’s
assertion to that effect is insufficient to show that any authority has been
granted. Accordingly, I cannot find that the operator had sufficient rights in
the land to enter into contracts in respect of it. Therefore the parking charge
notice cannot be held to be validly issued. In the light of this, I am not
required to consider the other issues raised by the appellant.
Accordingly, the appeal must be allowed.0 -
A colleague received a Parking Eye PCN at Warwick services for an alleged overstay, so I directed him to here, pepipoo and the prankster.
Using the advice from the above mentioned he made his 'soft appeal' which as usual was rejected and got his POPLA code.
He appealed to POPLA using the usual GPOL etc etc, and his appeal has now been upheld due to Parking Eye failing to submit anything in eveidence to either him or POPLA.
As per lots of other threads it appears that PE know they have no chance of winning so don't bother putting anything together for POPLA apart from a cheque for £27 + VAT ha ha
Great advice on these forums0 -
:j I have today received possibly the briefest Assessor's Determination I have read on this forum:-
"It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.
The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.
Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal."
Admittedly I did almost bottle it but decided to hand over the POPLA Appeal to "Parkingticketappeals" - it was the best £16 I have ever spent!
Thank you to everyone on the forum for their invaluable information and advice.0 -
today got email saying CPPlus had withdrawn their case and cancelled the parking charge, before it had got to POPLAs appeal hearing date.
So glad I 'bothered' to fight this and cannot thank those who helped me via this forum, enough.0 -
With this forums help i won my appeal against UKPC, after parking on private property in a side street in Reading. This was the response from POPLA:
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.
The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.
Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.
Shehla Pirwany
Assessor0 -
I won too, see transcript belowPARKING ON PRIVATE LAND APPEALS
18 September 2014
Reference 2922064001
always quote in any communication with POPLA
XXXX XXXXX(Appellant)
-v-
Highview Parking Limited (Operator)
The Operator issued parking charge notice number 450140604004 arising out of the presence at Premier House, Edgware, on 4 June 2014, of a vehicle with registration mark XXXX XXX.
The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.
2922064001 2 19 September 2014
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
At 09:32 on 4 June 2014, a vehicle with registration mark XXXX XXX was recorded by an ANPR system entering the car park at Premier House. The car was recorded leaving at 10:29, having violated the terms displayed on the signage. A parking charge notice was therefore issued.
The appellant raised more than one ground of appeal, however I shall only deal with the ground upon which the appeal is being allowed. Specifically, the appellant did not admit to being the driver and submitted that the notice to keeper was inadequate as it did not properly indicate the creditor.
The appellant has at no point admitted to being the driver of the vehicle and no evidence of this has been provided. Therefore in order for the appellant to be liable for the charge the keeper liability requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 must be complied with.
One of these requirements is the issue of a ‘notice to keeper’ compliant with certain provisions. In these circumstances, these provisions are found in paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 of the Act. The operator must produce evidence that this has occurred regardless of whether the issue is raised by the appellant, as the liability is not based in the law of contract but is created by the statute. The notice to keeper issued by the operator appears not to comply with sub-paragraph 2(h) as it does not identify the creditor. The identification of the operator as the organisation to which cheques should be made payable and to whom complaints may be made does not constitute an identification of the creditor, as an organisation that is not the creditor could perform all the specified roles. As the notice to keeper is not valid, I cannot find that the charge notice is enforceable against the appellant. In the light of this, I am not required to consider the appellant’s substantive case.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
Nadesh Karunairetnam
Assessor0 -
Your decision is worth highlighting so people appreciate the significance of a win on new grounds:
The appellant raised more than one ground of appeal, however I shall only deal with the ground upon which the appeal is being allowed. Specifically, the appellant did not admit to being the driver and submitted that the notice to keeper was inadequate as it did not properly indicate the creditor.
The operator must produce evidence that this has occurred regardless of whether the issue is raised by the appellant, as the liability is not based in the law of contract but is created by the statute. The notice to keeper issued by the operator appears not to comply with sub-paragraph 2(h) as it does not identify the creditor. The identification of the operator as the organisation to which cheques should be made payable and to whom complaints may be made does not constitute an identification of the creditor, as an organisation that is not the creditor could perform all the specified roles. As the notice to keeper is not valid, I cannot find that the charge notice is enforceable against the appellant.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
Wow.....a win on grounds other than GPEOL or PSDSU.
A rare thing indeed.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 248K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards