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
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 5th Jan 18, 4:10 PM
    • 36Posts
    • 11Thanks
    Pdmum
    pcn to registered keeper
    • #1
    • 5th Jan 18, 4:10 PM
    pcn to registered keeper 5th Jan 18 at 4:10 PM
    Received pcn as registered keeper. I am not the driver. Put in appeal using template letter which has been rejected. reason for rejection is different to reason shown on PCN. Does this breach POFA 4. If so what do i do now, I have been issued with a POPLA CODE.
Page 4
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 11:55 AM
    • 36 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Pdmum
    have managed to 'crop' down my comments and am just under 2000 characters with no spaces but just over with spaces.Will this go through ok?
    Can post for final perusal?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Feb 18, 3:57 PM
    • 53,902 Posts
    • 67,581 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Change and to ampersand, change long words into shorter words. Remove connectives.

    You need spaces.
    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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 5:18 PM
    • 36 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Thanks for that coupon mad, got it down to1934with spaces. If its to the Portal should i add the reference?
    Here it is ready to submit i hope!

    Images of signs are in daylight & not true indicators of conditions at time of the alleged breach
    Entrance sign is low unlit & not in field of vision for driver entering directly from a main road with no approach. P19 &27 contradict operators claim.
    P27 shows signs visible on exit only
    Operator has circled images of signage for clarity
    An exaggerated image is not a true representation of how the signs would appear to a motorist
    Operator says on P3 & P18 sign
    Parking period starts 5 mins after entry (below BPA CoP 10mins)
    Period has been wrongly calculated from time of payment/entry
    Statement below image P18 contradicts operators log P41 , not shown on PCN P5
    Operator’s log shows Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior to date of contravention is irrelevant & misleading, however I the Appellant was not in the vehicle on either occasion
    Operator says Appellants vehicle was parked for 4 hr & 21 mins, payment was made for 4 hr. An unpaid parking session occurred & a PCN was issued. This contradicts copy of PCN shown on P5
    Operator states ‘with regards to Appellants remarks that the parking charge notice is punitive & not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ .
    This statement has never been made by the appellant to the operator. Reference to Parking Eye Ltd v Mr Barry Beavis relates only to signage
    There is no site plan included in contract
    Original contract is undated with hand written amendments
    Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.
    A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date
    Parts 2 3 &4 are missing
    Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &17 are blank
    For these reasons no conclusion can be reached that the PCN has been issued correctly
    There are a catalogue of obvious errors with this evidence & I respectfully ask for POPLA to uphold my appeal & cancel this PCN
    Thank you

    I could also add to last paragraph that no evidence to oppose points 1&2 of appeal?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Feb 18, 5:25 PM
    • 53,902 Posts
    • 67,581 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    If its to the Portal should i add the reference?
    No need because you use the password & POPLA code to access your own spot in the Portal.

    How about:
    PPC had to circle images of signs, proves not prominent.
    instead of:
    Operator has circled images of signage for clarity
    This is far too long:

    Operator's The log shows Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior. to date of contravention is irrelevant & misleading,however I the Appellant I (keeper) was not in the vehicle on either occasion, which could have been two drivers and is irrelevant.
    Lose words there and you can add back some words to the most 'clipped' points, so they make sense.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 11-02-2018 at 5:29 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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 5:56 PM
    • 36 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Lovely thank you.
    Will edit and show changes .
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 8:18 PM
    • 36 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Hope this is good to go!

    Images of signs are in daylight & not true indicators of conditions at time of the alleged breach
    Entrance sign is low unlit & not in field of vision for driver entering directly from a main road .with no approach. P19 &27 contradict operators claim of approach.
    P27 shows entry signs visible on exit only
    PPC had to circle images of signs, proves not prominent.
    An exaggerated image is not a true representation of how the signs would appear to a motorist
    Operator says on P3 & P18 sign:-
    Parking period starts 5 mins after entry (below BPA CoP 10mins)
    Period has been wrongly calculated from time of payment/entry
    Statement below image P18 contradicts operators log P41 , and is irrelevant to PCN P5
    The log shows vehicle parked on site the day prior. I (keeper) was not in the vehicle on either occasion, which could have been two drivers and is irrelevant.
    Operator says Appellants vehicle was parked for 4 hr & 21 mins, payment was made for 4 hr. An unpaid parking session occurred & a PCN was issued. This contradicts copy of PCN shown on P5 & is irrelevant.
    Operator states ‘with regards to Appellants remarks that the parking charge notice is punitive & not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ .
    This statement has never been made by the appellant to the operator. Reference to Parking Eye Ltd v Mr Barry Beavis relates only to signage
    There is no site plan included in contract
    Original contract is undated with hand written amendments
    Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.
    A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date
    Parts 2 3 &4 are missing
    Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &17 are blank
    For these reasons no conclusion can be reached that the PCN has been issued correctly
    There are a catalogue of obvious errors with this evidence & points 1&2 of appeal are unopposed. I respectfully ask for POPLA to uphold my appeal & cancel this PCN
    Thank you
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Feb 18, 9:59 PM
    • 53,902 Posts
    • 67,581 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I would cut & paste all of this to the top, as the contract is your best hand at POPLA:

    There is no site plan included in contract
    Original contract is undated with hand written amendments
    Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.
    A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date
    Parts 2 3 &4 are missing
    Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &17 are blank
    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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 10:26 PM
    • 36 Posts
    • 11 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Thank you for all your help with this.
    Fingers crossed!
    Will update the result.
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

2,969Posts Today

9,843Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • I've been asked a few times if I'd been approached about chairing or being on the independent panel on post 18/stud? https://t.co/LpWASObp9k

  • Just finished on @bbc5live talking student finance. So complex talking all the iterations

  • On @bbc5live now half way through explaining how student finance reallyw orks

  • Follow Martin