Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 10th Apr 17, 1:36 PM
    • 70Posts
    • 16Thanks
    Roshi
    IAS Appeal dismissal
    • #1
    • 10th Apr 17, 1:36 PM
    IAS Appeal dismissal 10th Apr 17 at 1:36 PM
    Hi


    I recently appealed a parking notice from UK CPM ltd via the IAS
    see below :


    MY ORIGINAL APPEAL :
    as well as the residents park our cars here regularly, my vehicle has been parked here weekly for the past 2 yrs and I have never received a parking invoice. It is causing no damage or obstruction to other cars as you can see from the photo I have uploaded there is a car access the road at ease. The signage that the CPM have on display is illegal and therefore not valid. they have the BPA symbol for accredited operator on and they are not accredited operators they are members only. I have photos uploaded also and I have checked with the BPA. The " contract is therefore not valid. Not to mention the height of the signage makes it un readable.




    CPM RESPONDED:
    The operator reported that...

    The appellant was the keeper.
    The operator is seeking keeper liability in accordance with PoFA..
    The Notice to Keeper (Non-ANPR) was sent on 31/01/2017.
    A manual ticket was placed on the vehicle.
    The ticket was issued on 28/12/2016.
    The charge is based in Contract.


    The operator made the following comments...

    The appellant has parked on an access road/roadway. The appellant has parked within clear view of our sign. Signage clearly states "NO PARKING ON ACCESS ROADS & NO PARKING OUTSIDE OF A DESIGNATED AREA/PARKING BAY". By the appellant parking at the restricted area, they have contractually agreed to pay the parking charge notice.

    Markings on roadways such as yellow lines are not applicable within private land. All signage clearly states the terms and conditions of parking and therefore parking restrictions were clearly breached and a parking charge notice was subsequently issued.

    UK CPM no longer uses the “Approved member” BPA logo but as we are still a corporate member of BPA we are still authorised to use the standard BPA logo on our literature. Currently we are working towards removing the logo from all of our signs, as you can appreciate we have thousands of sites throughout the UK therefore we were given time to ensure they were all removed.


    MY RESPONSE :


    The place of which the vehicle was parked is not causing damage or obstructing through roads and it is not clear that you are unable to park there. Having parked there regularly for over two years without a parking notice. Not consistence in handing out notices. The sign on site clearly still states registered operator of BPA of which they are not. The BPA have confirmed this sigh is not legitimate while displaying the approved operator badge unless the company are a approved operator. Therefore making the " contract" not valid. I appreciate they have many sites but this is not down to me to mange. The sign has stated that logo since the day the parking notice was received plenty of time to remove signage. Either way the sign is not legal making the contract invalid.




    INDEPENDENT ADJUDICATOR RESPONSE


    The Operator has provided evidence of the signs at the site, which make it clear any driver parking on the roadway may be issued with the parking charge notice. The Operator has also provided photographic evidence of the Appellant’s vehicle parked on the land managed by the Operator, in close proximity to a sign advertising the terms, and on the roadway. Therefore, I am satisfied there is a prima facie case the charge is lawful.

    The Appellant argues they have parked at this location for two years without any issues and caused no obstruction. I am unable to consider previous parking behaviour as this is irrelevant to the question of whether the parking charge notice was lawfully issued. In addition the terms make no exception for those not causing obstruction.

    The Appellant further contends there could be no lawful contract as the sign refers to the BPA, when the Operator is not an accredited member, and the sign is too high to be legible. In relation to the first point, as the Operator mentions they remain corporate members of the BPA, which entitles them to use the logo. Even if this were wildly inaccurate and the Operator simply failed to change the logo on their sign it would not alter the terms, or the fact the Appellant agreed to them by parking as they did. The Appellant has provided a photograph of the sign, which appears high, but there is nothing against which to judge this, such as a vehicle to assess the height and scale. There is no evidence this cannot be read when stood near to the sign.

    The appeal is dismissed.




    can anyone advise me on what to do next,


    Thank you in advance
Page 3
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 10th Jul 17, 9:44 AM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    I will take look thanks ))
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 8:30 AM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    Hi

    I now have the Claim form from county court .. panicking slightly.

    I have acknowledged online but no written a defense yet can you help ?!?!?!

    Many thanks
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 8:34 AM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    Hi

    Its been a while...like you said it would be

    I have the court paper now

    Any chance You could offer some advise and help me with my defense
    • Johnersh
    • By Johnersh 9th Oct 17, 9:05 AM
    • 642 Posts
    • 1,210 Thanks
    Johnersh
    It's time for you to do your homework. Your defence is likely to include:

    (a) Forbidding signs - read more here https://bmpa.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/208607905--Forbidding-Signs

    (b) Entitlement to use of the land - assuming your tenancy/leasehold provides for it, there is an argument that provision to pass and repass over the land does not prohibit parking (and unless the terms of the property do expressly forbid it).
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 9:32 AM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    Hi


    Thank you for your reply.

    I will read over the sign, I am easily confused by all of this and don't understand a lot of it . I assume they actually rely on people not understanding the signage

    One thing that I mentioned in my original appeal was that the signage has an accredited logo from the BPA on it and they aren't actually accredited they are members only ...could this be used in my defense. I spoke with the BPA and they have emailed me the logo that they are allowed to use and have said that the one they do use they aren't meant to



    Thanks in advance
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 9th Oct 17, 11:26 AM
    • 15,423 Posts
    • 24,121 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    You need to get yourself up to speed with this. There’s comprehensive advice and guidance provided for dealing with court cases in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2. That has to be your ‘Bible’ from here on to ensure you are dealing with everything you need to deal with.

    One thing that I mentioned in my original appeal was that the signage has an accredited logo from the BPA on it and they aren't actually accredited they are members only ...could this be used in my defense. I spoke with the BPA and they have emailed me the logo that they are allowed to use and have said that the one they do use they aren't meant to
    It might help if a judge is going to be particularly picky, but there are much stronger defence points, as suggested by Johnersh (above) and others you will find in post #2 of the sticky, pertaining to residential PCNs.

    Have you taken photos of the signage to back up your point about the logo - that I’d suggest will be essential if you are to build the logo issue into your defence. (Please note correct spelling of *DEFENCE’. We are not in the USA. )
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    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.
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 12:35 PM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    Thank you

    Yes I have pictures and the original emails from the BPA in regards to the signage

    I will read sticky post #2

    Thanks for the grammar point

    Roshi
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 9th Oct 17, 12:55 PM
    • 7,374 Posts
    • 6,421 Thanks
    The Deep
    If someone claims membership of a trade body of which they are not members, then surely this is a matter for Trading Standards as well.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 1:19 PM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    Yes would assume so. I have reported them to the BPA and they said they would contact them and ask them to remove. As of yesterday the signs remain the same. I reported them in December 2016

    I also wrote this in my original appeal and their ( UK CPM ) response was they have hundreds of signs up across the UK and can not change them all

    I am shocked that this cannot be my defence I would have thought their signage being incorrect would invalidate any parking charges ... as it states " you are contractually agreeing to pay " ... yes with a BPA accredited company of which they aren't
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 1:39 PM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    I have read the Newbies post ( the sub headings under #2) and I am seriously lost as to what example applies to me and my defence. Please feel free to roll your eyes at me … I can imagine it’s frustrating that I am not understanding all this

    Can anyone advise me, I am clearly not understanding. I feel like I should just pay now as I can’t see my winning anything in court
    • safarmuk
    • By safarmuk 9th Oct 17, 1:46 PM
    • 613 Posts
    • 1,122 Thanks
    safarmuk
    Were you parked in your allocated space (that comes with the flat), a pool parking space or on the road in the estate where your flat is?

    Are you an owner (you would have a lease) or a tenant (you would have an Assured Shorthold Tenancy agreement)? Whichever it is you need to check what it says on parking.

    it would not alter the terms, or the fact the Appellant agreed to them by parking as they did.
    So this will boil down to whether the contract the PPC want to bind you to is valid. Look at the host of other "Residential Parking" or "Own Space" threads so you understand better.
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 2:07 PM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    Hi

    I wasn't parked in a bay there is absolutely no allocated parking on this estate at all, I was parked on teh road side that wasn't marked with any lines etc.

    I don't reside there my friend who lives there parked my vehicle there.
    • Herzlos
    • By Herzlos 9th Oct 17, 2:13 PM
    • 5,956 Posts
    • 5,417 Thanks
    Herzlos
    Bear in mind that if you lose and have to pay up, you'll probably have to pay less than they are asking for now, so you may as well go the distance. They might not even turn up, and if they do, they tend to be pretty useless as far as solicitors go.

    You want to look at other county court cases on here and list as many legal arguments why it's not valid.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 9th Oct 17, 2:14 PM
    • 4,411 Posts
    • 2,728 Thanks
    KeithP
    Hi

    I wasn't parked in a bay there is absolutely no allocated parking on this estate at all, I was parked on teh road side that wasn't marked with any lines etc.

    I don't reside there my friend who lives there parked my vehicle there.
    Originally posted by Roshi
    Then your friend, the resident, needs to dig out his lease or tenancy agreement and see what is says, if anything, about parking.
    .
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 2:15 PM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    I have asked them to do this, hopefully it says something in there.
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 2:16 PM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi
    I was under the impression you didnt actually go to a court room?
    • safarmuk
    • By safarmuk 9th Oct 17, 2:24 PM
    • 613 Posts
    • 1,122 Thanks
    safarmuk
    Then your friend, the resident, needs to dig out his lease or tenancy agreement and see what is says, if anything, about parking.
    Absolutely.

    I was under the impression you didnt actually go to a court room?
    By "court room" in the Small Claims Court they generally mean a small room with a table you all sit round and hear the case, you, the claimant and a District Judge. No gowns, no wigs, just people dressed smartly. Nothing to worry about. If you win, you pay nothing, if you lose you pay what you are told to pay within the timeline and either way it's all over.

    I can assure you there will be no handcuffs, no dock, no being taken down etc.
    • Roshi
    • By Roshi 9th Oct 17, 2:33 PM
    • 70 Posts
    • 16 Thanks
    Roshi


    Thank you ... goodness I actually panicked a little more then.

    I will wait for my friend to take a look at the lease, I have asked them to do it before as they and their neighbors regularly get notices and pay them or ignore them ... it really is a joke

    Thank you for your support
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 9th Oct 17, 2:36 PM
    • 6,328 Posts
    • 8,139 Thanks
    beamerguy
    This will give you a good idea of county court

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93eoaxhzpU

    ARRIVING AT COURT
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZyb4HYC5A8
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 9th Oct 17, 7:12 PM
    • 7,374 Posts
    • 6,421 Thanks
    The Deep
    Have you seen Judge Rinder? CC is nothing like that, no gowns, no dock, no usher, usually no audience, no flags, no hissy drama queen.
    Last edited by The Deep; 09-10-2017 at 8:02 PM.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

132Posts Today

1,436Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I believe I can boldly go where no twitter poll has gone before https://t.co/HA0jC92gAK

  • OK I'm wilting to public pressure and there will be a star trek captain's poll at some point next week

  • I can get that. My order is 1. Picard 2. Janeway 3. Kirk. Too early to say where Lorca will end up (or would you? https://t.co/kawtCOe9RA

  • Follow Martin