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
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 6th Dec 17, 8:22 PM
    • 17Posts
    • 21Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    POPLA unsuccessful
    • #1
    • 6th Dec 17, 8:22 PM
    POPLA unsuccessful 6th Dec 17 at 8:22 PM
    Hello,
    My POPLA descision was unsuccessful.

    The real reason I couldn't pay for my ticket was because the machines I tried wouldn't take my card, had no cash on me and no phone to call the number. I didn't use this reason I used the information on this site when contesting it.

    Popla descision was made 21 days after my appeal but it says I can appeal this to the ombudsman. Is that the next step or shall I just wait and go to court?
    My other worry is I am potentially taking a job abroad at the end of next year, what would happen if I get a summons after leaving the country?

    Also parking eye didn't even submit any information.

    Here is there response:

    DecisionUnsuccessful
    Assessor Name
    Assessor summary of operator case
    The operator!!!8217;s case is that the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session.

    Assessor summary of your case
    The appellant!!!8217;s case is that the operator has not complied with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012). The appellant advises that the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. He states that a contract was not entered into between the operator and the motorist. The appellant has also disputed the operator!!!8217;s authority to issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) on the land.

    Assessor supporting rational for decision
    The terms and conditions of the site state: !!!8220;Parking Tariffs Apply. Up to 3 hours!!!8230;£16.00. Failure to comply with the terms & conditions will result in a Parking Charge of: £100!!!8221;. The operator has issued the PCN as the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session. Images from the operator!!!8217;s Automatic Number Plate Recognition system have been provided, which show that the appellant!!!8217;s vehicle entered the car park at 13:32 and exited at 15:34 on the day in question, staying for a total of two hours and one minutes. A copy of its whitelist payment lookup has also been provided, showing that the motorist did not make a payment to park at the site that day. The appellant!!!8217;s case is that the operator has not complied with PoFA 2012. The appellant advises that the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. He states that a contract was not entered into between the operator and the motorist. When parking on private land, the motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage at the site sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. Therefore upon entry to the car park, it is the duty of the motorist to review and comply with the terms and conditions when deciding to park. In this case, it is not clear who the driver of the vehicle in question is, so I must consider the provisions of PoFA 2012 as the operator has issued the PCN to the keeper of the vehicle. The operator has provided a copy of the notice to keeper sent to the appellant. I have reviewed the notice to keeper against the relevant sections of the PoFA 2012 and I am satisfied that it is compliant, and that the operator has successfully transferred liability and is able to pursue the keeper of the vehicle. The appellant has disputed the operator!!!8217;s authority to issue PCNs on the land. Section 7.1 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice outlines to operators, !!!8220;If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you the authority to carry out all the aspects of car park management for the site that you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges!!!8221;. The operator has provided a copy of its supply agreement with the landowner. Upon review of this, I am satisfied that the operator has sufficient authority to issue PCNs on the land in line with the British Parking Association Code of Practice!!!8217;s requirements. Ultimately, it is a motorist!!!8217;s responsibility to ensure they comply with the terms and conditions of a site when parking on it. As the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session, they have failed to adhere to the site!!!8217;s terms and conditions. As such, I conclude that the PCN was issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal.
Page 2
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 22nd Jan 18, 11:44 PM
    • 6,957 Posts
    • 9,056 Thanks
    beamerguy
    They couldn!!!8217;t email PE directly as they said the agreement they have with PE only allows 2 months for them to get involved. They were very apologetic and stated I was misinformed before but said it is the agreement they have with PE.
    Originally posted by AIMINGHIGH123
    Amazing and a stupid hotel for signing that

    By the time the appeal goes to PE, they reject it,
    it goes to POPLA ...... so odd, those 2 months are
    up ...what a scam ???

    Answer must be that where PE are involved,
    get it cancelled by the principal upon receipt
    of the NtK ..... WITHIN 2 MONTHS.

    I wonder if Steve Clark of the BPA would
    like to comment on this little wheeze by PE ?

    Maybe the Which Magazine and Sir Greg Knight
    could look at this as a restriction ???
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 24th Jan 18, 11:14 AM
    • 17 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    That!!!8217;s what I said to them but they just said that!!!8217;s the agreement.

    The only thing I could have done is as soon as I got the PCN is to have contacted the hotel straight away. I got PCN a month after I was there so would have had a month to get the hotel to help.
    I didn!!!8217;t know the hotel owned the land, I only found this out very recently and that most of the time these parking companies are just contracted in.

    The hotel sent me a receipt that shows I paid for parking and I have sent a copy to PE. I will see what happens next.

    This has been quite stressful but equally I have learnt a lot. Having spoken to a lot of my friends who have had situations like this they told me they just paid the PCN £45 or whatever it is and didn!!!8217;t know they could contest the tickets.

    I can not believe in this day and age that companies like this exist.
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 24th Jan 18, 11:26 AM
    • 8,195 Posts
    • 7,515 Thanks
    The Deep
    Have you complained to your MP?
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 13th Feb 18, 5:45 PM
    • 17 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    Hi,

    Right so I sent PE the parking receipt as proof of payment that I received from the hotel.

    They are still refusing to accept this and I have 14 days to pay £100 or further action will be taken against me.

    To some up:
    I didn!!!8217;t realise PE didn!!!8217;t own the land at the hotel so I didn!!!8217;t get a receipt straight away from the hotel.
    Appealed via POPLA however this was rejected and they said I should have seen evidence from PE which I never did and I had checked on my account a couple of times.
    I have emailed POPLA 3 times since but they never responded.
    I then found out PE doesn!!!8217;t own the car park they just manage it so I contact hotel and they had my car details and date I was there so sent through the receipt of payment that I had made to the front desk in the first place. They couldn!!!8217;t send it to PE as it had been outside of the agreed timeline they had with PE.
    I sent the proof of payment to PE as they have sent me a Letter Before Court but they still say I owe £100.

    I feel like I am going round in circles at the moment.
    If I go to Court surely the letter I have that has the date, my car reg and payment received on it is good evidence?

    Thanks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Feb 18, 6:50 PM
    • 54,072 Posts
    • 67,729 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I then found out PE doesn't own the car park they just manage it so I contact hotel and they had my car details and date I was there so sent through the receipt of payment that I had made to the front desk in the first place.
    PE never own car parks they infest, they are a parasite company with no consumer customers.

    I sent the proof of payment to PE as they have sent me a Letter Before Court but they still say I owe £100.
    Good, did you email that to:

    enforcement@parkingeye.co.uk

    If not, then email and bother them, they are the litigation team.

    If yes, and the latest refusal came from that team, email them and tell them 'see you in court, you have no legitimate interest excuse, Beavis cannot apply, and I will use the Hotel's evidence in my defence, as well as drawing the court's attention to the fact that ParkingEye were named and shamed just ten days ago in Parliament, as (Hansard words) as part of an industry described as an 'outrageous scam'. The words MPs used included:

    ''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.
    Tell PE you will now complain to your MP about this 'outrageous scam' (Hansard wording).

    If I go to Court surely the letter I have that has the date, my car reg and payment received on it is good evidence?
    Yes, it blows their 'legitimate interest' in pursuing a penalty, to smithereens, IMHO. The PE v Beavis case cannot apply where there is no commercial justification behind the penalty.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 14-02-2018 at 11:55 AM.
    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.

    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 13th Feb 18, 7:16 PM
    • 17 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    Thanks Coupon.

    I cannot believe these companies exist and it has been a real eye opener.
    I also read the article about it and found it quite reassuring that they have been shamed in Parliament.
    These companies have been around for years how many people have just paid up for genuine mistakes? Thousands, millions.

    It was indeed the enforcement team I emailed, so I will email them again.

    I will keep you updated.

    Thank you
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 14th Feb 18, 6:21 AM
    • 16,664 Posts
    • 26,066 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    These companies have been around for years how many people have just paid up for genuine mistakes? Thousands, millions.
    The private parking skimdustry as a whole issues over 5 million tickets a year.
    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.
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

5,275Posts Today

7,300Users online

Martin's Twitter