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
    • Pinklady0805
    • By Pinklady0805 2nd Aug 17, 10:33 PM
    • 82Posts
    • 55Thanks
    Pinklady0805
    Meadowhall shopping centre POPLA Appeal CPPlus
    • #1
    • 2nd Aug 17, 10:33 PM
    Meadowhall shopping centre POPLA Appeal CPPlus 2nd Aug 17 at 10:33 PM
    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
Page 8
    • pogofish
    • By pogofish 4th Sep 17, 5:15 PM
    • 7,521 Posts
    • 7,556 Thanks
    pogofish
    Is it possible for you to post a copy of your POPLA appeal on here. I'm currently fighting a Meadowhall parking ticket myself and would be interested to see what you have included.
    Thanks.
    Originally posted by wrighteye1
    Don't hijack other people's threads please. You clearly agreed not to!

    Keep to your own thread and read the Newbies Sticky for a head start/best current advice.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 4th Sep 17, 5:20 PM
    • 7,004 Posts
    • 6,074 Thanks
    The Deep
    Hardly hijacking, this is a polite request for information.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • RobinofLoxley
    • By RobinofLoxley 4th Sep 17, 5:28 PM
    • 121 Posts
    • 211 Thanks
    RobinofLoxley
    Hardly hijacking, this is a polite request for information.
    Originally posted by The Deep
    I agree, he's not hijacking, there's no need to get all 'uppity'
    Last edited by RobinofLoxley; 04-09-2017 at 5:35 PM.
    • Pinklady0805
    • By Pinklady0805 8th Sep 17, 7:32 AM
    • 82 Posts
    • 55 Thanks
    Pinklady0805
    Hi, yes l agree with robinofloxley above, as soon as my decision comes through I'll gladly post it up for you to read.
    • Pinklady0805
    • By Pinklady0805 8th Sep 17, 8:10 AM
    • 82 Posts
    • 55 Thanks
    Pinklady0805
    Yes robin ive submitted my evidence pack, popla confirmed to me that they have received it too so just got to play the waiting game now :-/ fingers crossed
    • Half_way
    • By Half_way 8th Sep 17, 10:14 AM
    • 3,772 Posts
    • 5,334 Thanks
    Half_way
    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.
    How were these issues addressed when your employer carried out a risk assessment on the new car park arrangement?
    How are other colleague's with mobility issues taken into consideration?
    From the Plain Language Commission:

    "The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"
    • Pinklady0805
    • By Pinklady0805 8th Sep 17, 11:19 AM
    • 82 Posts
    • 55 Thanks
    Pinklady0805
    I don't believe our employer has done a risk assessment, meadowhall did one and said it was fine lol! Colleague's with mobility issues are having a right fight at the minute because meadowhall have taken there dispensation's off them and they are struggling to make the walk. Meadowhall are refusing to take any doctors letters now. Some older staff are leaving as they just can't do it! My pregnant friend was told she could have a dispensation when she got to her last stages in pregnancy but they haven't do it looking like she going to have to go on maternity early.

    As anyone got any recommendations on unions please? We're not sure who to use but think we need one.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 8th Sep 17, 12:17 PM
    • 50,024 Posts
    • 63,417 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    A special 'Disability Risk Assessment' should have been done to consider the specific needs of colleagues with a medical condition (nothing to do with Blue Badges, people do not have to have a permit to be considered disabled - just a long term 12 month continuing condition/difficulty that would make such a trek harder work for them).

    The disabled, ill elderly and pregnant colleagues should get in touch with the EHRC for advice:

    https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act/know-your-rights

    It is 'discrimination' to treat everyone the same, even though plenty of firms don't realise it.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Pinklady0805
    • By Pinklady0805 8th Sep 17, 1:23 PM
    • 82 Posts
    • 55 Thanks
    Pinklady0805
    Thank you Coupon-mad.

    Cp plus have sent emails saying that they will not supply Popla codes to us now as our employers has confirmed we were working on the days in question And that they have images of who was driving, are they just trying to scare us into paying because they can't do this can they?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 8th Sep 17, 2:20 PM
    • 50,024 Posts
    • 63,417 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    The colleague (or more than one, ideally) who got that email should send them to the BPA and DVLA if CP Plus are denying POPLA codes when the person HAS appealed in time to get one. CP Plus can deny a POPLA code only if the person appealed too late, more than 28 days after the postal NTK. They MUST otherwise supply POPLA codes.

    aos@britishparking.co.uk

    and

    david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

    They MUST allow a keeper a POPLA code in particular, because it's not just about whether the driver breached terms, it is also about allowing a keeper to appeal (as is their right) and of course the keepers can win on 'no keeper liability' every time...

    And, bottom line, who is to say that the worker wasn't just a passenger of their husband or wife who was genuinely there to shop that day? Where's the evidence? The burden is CP Plus' and the colleagues need to know NOT to give such info away or assume they are stuffed. They are not.

    Also, those colleagues where it seems CP Plus have been given private, unauthorised (by the employee) information from Meadowhall about whether a driver was working or not, should urgently complain online to the Information Commissioner, about misuse of their private data (work records) by Meadowhall. So it seems Meadowhall have handed over information about work shifts without the agreement of the employee, to a third party who are not entitled to that information, as I see it.

    ICO complaints are simple to do online, focus that complaint on the MISUSE OF DATA (work records) being shared with a third party without lawful reason. And unlike the BPA & DVLA complaints which must come from the keeper/appellant, the ICO complaint MUST come from the person whose data it is, which might not be the same person as complains to the BPA and DVLA.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 08-09-2017 at 11:16 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • RobinofLoxley
    • By RobinofLoxley 8th Sep 17, 7:36 PM
    • 121 Posts
    • 211 Thanks
    RobinofLoxley
    I'm astounded that CP Plus have said in emails to keepers they won't allow the keeper to appeal at POPLA.

    As Coupon-mad says offering a keeper to appeal at POPLA is one of the fundamental requirements of being a member of the BPA's AOS.

    I agree C-m that a strong complaint to the BPA is necessary. Though seeing as Grahame Rose a director of and employed as 'Director of Development' at CP Plus is also on the board of the BPA. Can you see the BPA investigating?
    • RobinofLoxley
    • By RobinofLoxley 8th Sep 17, 10:34 PM
    • 121 Posts
    • 211 Thanks
    RobinofLoxley
    As anyone got any recommendations on unions please? We're not sure who to use but think we need one.
    Originally posted by Pinklady0805
    Don't know much about unions but maybe USDAW is worth a look. I think the subs are about £2 a week.

    I'm not recommending them in any way, no idea if they're good or not.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 8th Sep 17, 11:03 PM
    • 14,537 Posts
    • 22,879 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    You might find the last 3 pages of this thread of interest/relevance.

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=73099071#post73099071
    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.
    • Pinklady0805
    • By Pinklady0805 9th Sep 17, 4:06 PM
    • 82 Posts
    • 55 Thanks
    Pinklady0805
    Thanks all I'll have a look!

    Would anyone mind if I posted a couple of photos up here just for your view really, it's what my friend has received back from cp plus after submitting here evidence for court? Only I think they are playing games with us all now, and I'd like to know your thoughts. There asking her to submit copies her car log book as well as other things, surely if they going ahead with court as they state to her they are then it should be the court asking for these things shouldn't it not them!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Sep 17, 7:52 PM
    • 50,024 Posts
    • 63,417 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    There asking her to submit copies her car log book as well as other things
    And how does the V5 help them find the driver?! it only names the keeper who might never even drive it (e.g. I am the keeper of the car my husband drives, and I almost never use it).

    And why should she assist, this is for them to evidence, as claimant, who the driver was.

    In the other Meadowhall thread, it's been said by Robin of Loxley, that Meadowhall went round the retailers asking for their lists of employees and VRNs. And the OP of the other thread has quoted an email from CP Plus that admits they've been passed a list of employees' VRNs and are using it to assume the keepers of those cars are 'guilty' of something when they aren't even Meadowhall employees!

    Horrendous DPA breach, surely.

    I think the group needs to club together for legal advice about DPA breach here, their employers (surely?) can't pass on a list of staff to the Centre, who then passed it on the CP Plus who don't use the POFA for keeper liability, can only hold drivers liable, and have no idea who was driving the car.

    The group of employees also need to get their MP involved in all this, and the local press.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 09-09-2017 at 7:57 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • Ryandavis1959
    • By Ryandavis1959 9th Sep 17, 10:14 PM
    • 108 Posts
    • 30 Thanks
    Ryandavis1959
    Why will the local MP want to help when these people are refusing to use the staff parking area that Meadowhall want them to park in (oh sorry, I forgot, none of them were parking and their partners/aunts/dogs were driving them to work each day)? Do you realise how important Meadowhall is to the economy in that part of the world and how large an employer they are? Why do you think that thr MP will support these people ahead of the wishes of Meadowhall?

    As I have mentioned throughout this thread, you guys seriously need to get proper legal advice. Learn from the nurses case!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Sep 17, 11:43 PM
    • 50,024 Posts
    • 63,417 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Jeez, you do give the game away what side you really sit on. Meadowhall, CP Plus and the retailers are handing round and sharing lists of employees' private data like it's a local book club, and you can't see that's utterly unacceptable.

    Your post is IMHO, not worthy of further response.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 10th Sep 17, 10:00 AM
    • 5,955 Posts
    • 7,672 Thanks
    beamerguy
    Ryandavis1959

    As usual you have NOT smelt the coffee yet have you

    Nothing whatsoever to do with the size of employer etc

    THIS IS GIVING DATA TO A THIRD PARTY COMPANY
    and in this case to a scammer/cowboy

    Of course an MP will be concerned about sharing data ??

    "As I have mentioned throughout this thread, you guys seriously need to get proper legal advice. Learn from the nurses case!"

    As you already know the advice giving on this forum is far
    better than the pretend legals who get involved with the Cowboys

    The only thing to learn about the nurses case is the disgusting
    behaviour of the NHS towards their staff and a defunct
    Jeremy Hunt who afterwards pampered himself in a new
    £44,000 bathroom for his office. SMELL THE COFFEE ???

    You came to this forum blasting off to send money to
    support Carly in Dundee.
    What lesson have you learned from this ??
    ANSWER = NEVER NAME THE DRIVER

    In a previous post I asked you what YOU did to help Carly.
    You never replied ..... now is your chance

    Your comments are unsavoury to say the least and once
    again you select to be treated as someone not to be respected
    on this forum.

    Think first before you post in future.
    To me, you sound like a very frustrated PPC

    The frustration, I can understand given the very high success
    rate of this forum
    Last edited by beamerguy; 10-09-2017 at 10:37 AM.
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • LadyCinders24
    • By LadyCinders24 14th Sep 17, 5:09 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    LadyCinders24
    Hi all


    I am following Pink Lady's story as I am in a very similar position - worked at Meadowhall in 2015/16, receievd fines etc now I have had (I think) a LBC. Please can someone advise how I set up a new thread to get some help and advice on this situation.


    Thanks
    • waamo
    • By waamo 14th Sep 17, 5:15 PM
    • 2,011 Posts
    • 2,429 Thanks
    waamo
    Hi all


    I am following Pink Lady's story as I am in a very similar position - worked at Meadowhall in 2015/16, receievd fines etc now I have had (I think) a LBC. Please can someone advise how I set up a new thread to get some help and advice on this situation.


    Thanks
    Originally posted by LadyCinders24
    Click this link, it tells you how.
    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=66109023&postcount=5
    This space for hire.
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

187Posts Today

1,584Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Shana tova umetuka - a sweet Jewish New Year to all celebrating. I won't be online the rest of t'week, as I take the time to be with family

  • Dear Steve. Please note doing a poll to ask people's opinion does not in itself imply an opinion! https://t.co/UGvWlMURxy

  • Luciana is on the advisory board of @mmhpi (we have MPs from most parties) https://t.co/n99NAxGAAQ

  • Follow Martin