PPS Parking Notice - I've already appealed

Coupon-mad

ShivyDevon wrote: »

I certainly don't intend on paying unless there is a likelihood I am going to be taken to court and lose!!

I've tried to do some reading on POPLA but I'm getting myself confused. What if they don't see in may favour? I had the ticket but was not displayed as it blew over so I contravened the notices in the car park technically. Do I then have to pay?

Sorry I am sure it should be simple but legal speak just confuses me.

Thank you

POPLA is simple, is not binding on you but costs the PPC money, and is likely to get the fake PCN cancelled.

Thread discussing the right wording to win POPLA appeals (please make sure you use the lack of ownership of the car park by the scammer PPC as a point as well as requiring them to cough up the contract with the landowner (2 separate points).

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4447137



HTH, let's see your draft appeal. We can help.

trisontana

POPLA do muddy the waters in their judgement. I have seen a couple of instances now where the motorist has lost and POPLA has stated on that judgement "You are now required to pay £x within x days."

Of course the motorist is not "required" to pay anything. If the PPC wants their money they would still have take the motorist to court and prove their case before a judge.

peter_the_piper

"You are now required to pay £x within x days."

This point is on their FAQ's which failed appealers (is that a word) would go to and take as gospel. It needs changing but I can't see that the BPA/Popla will do so.

trisontana

Instead they should state at the top of the appeal in big bold letters. "This decision is not binding on the motorist". That's the law, so why aren't they doing it?

ShivyDevon_2

Ok I have read the POPLA website a bit more and found this re: grounds for appeal

"THE VEHICLE WAS NOT IMPROPERLY PARKED

e.g. that the vehicle was not parked where stated on the parking charge notice; that you believe you were still within the time you paid for; that the voucher was clearly displayed or that the conditions were not properly signed.
However, the fact that you did not see the sign; that you bought a voucher but it fell down, that you did not see the bay markings or that you did not realise that you could not park where you did are not valid grounds of appeal."


Above being my reasoning. So I cannot use the fact I bought a ticket but that it blew over without me realising as grounds for appeal. So what do I do? How do I know they don't have contract to do the parking charges/enforcement? What if they do - I'm screwed right?


Sorry I am getting a bit panicky and thinking I should have just paid it in the first place cos I'm going to be ordered to from Court

ManxRed

You won't be taken to court, forget that.

Any claim the PPC brought would be laughed out of court in five minutes. They know this too so for that reason they won't even try.

In your appeal to POPLA (forget their stupid criteria for appealing) make sure that one of your defence points is that you refute that the parking company has sufficient proprietary/occupational rights conferred upon them with respect to the land in question to offer parking contracts at all, and that you want to see a copy of the contract they hold with the landowner.

The PPC will never divulge this and POPLA should find in your favour. We've seen it happen quite a few times already.

That ought to make you slightly less uneasy, no?

Coupon-mad

ShivyDevon wrote: »

Ok I have read the POPLA website a bit more and found this re: grounds for appeal

"THE VEHICLE WAS NOT IMPROPERLY PARKED

e.g. that the vehicle was not parked where stated on the parking charge notice; that you believe you were still within the time you paid for; that the voucher was clearly displayed or that the conditions were not properly signed.
However, the fact that you did not see the sign; that you bought a voucher but it fell down, that you did not see the bay markings or that you did not realise that you could not park where you did are not valid grounds of appeal."


Above being my reasoning. So I cannot use the fact I bought a ticket but that it blew over without me realising as grounds for appeal. So what do I do? How do I know they don't have contract to do the parking charges/enforcement? What if they do - I'm screwed right?


Sorry I am getting a bit panicky and thinking I should have just paid it in the first place cos I'm going to be ordered to from Court

Oh for goodness sake, just tick the first box and appeal, anyone can appeal to POPLA and the most important point IS NOT whether they have a contract or not (they WILL have one but you do still demand they show POPLA because if they refuse they are stuffed), IMHO the most important point and I keep saying this, is whether they have any ownership/legal title in the car park (they won't).

My post #9 here refers to a poster who also thought they couldn't appeal for some daft reason:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4473233

Just tick a box and stop thinking you are screwed. Look at mulronie's wording as I linked in that thread.

Show us your draft here first and we can help. YOU WILL NOT LOSE THIS AT POPLA AND YOU WILL NOT NEED A NEW HAT FOR COURT!

ShivyDevon_2

OK Coupon-mad - I understand you're old hat on this forum and you are repeating yourself (you perceive it that way any way) but there is no reason to be rude. I appreciate the help so far but this is my first ticket that I have not paid and I am not au fait with the legal or appeal process. The fact this appeal needs to be strongly and securely worded is a worry and I want to get it right!

Couple of questions:
1) Do I mention the fact that I bought a ticket and it blew over (I know it's not a arguement for the appeal but it is a fact all the same)?
2) The date of the refusal letter from PPS was 12th February - I received it on 6th March. I moved address on 16th February and hadn't received the letter by that point. I went to collect post and was given it on that occassion. Basically it says I have 28days to appeal but now I have missed that deadline.....should I still go through POPLA? Says they may extend the 28 day period in some circumstances.
3) Should I take photographs of the parking notice? Will this help me in this particular case?
4) Seems the crux is land ownership I get that...am I the only one who struggles with legal type wording?
5) Do I make a representation that the parking charge is disproportionate to the loss incurred to the operator under Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997(especially considering I already paid the full days parking charge!)?
6) Am I supposed to be writing something like #27 in the thread you refer to re: wording? If so, I am not sure I understand point 1 and if it's what I think it is then I think the sign is quite clear re: parking terms (though I doubt it mentions the word 'contract') and is right next to the pay machines...?

I apologise in advance for all the questions just want to get it right....

ShivyDevon_2

Also re: a contract - as I have already stated in my appeal to them:
1 - I bought a ticket (does this not mean I enter a contract)?
2 - I use the car park regularly (could they argue I should already know the terms)?

I understand this isn't the crux (it's land ownership) I am just trying to vary the wording so I don't get accused of using a 'standard' response 'from the internet'.

Coupon-mad

Sorry I am a grouchy mare sometimes! I do get bored and frustrated sometimes on here but always want people to be comfortable appealing and going to POPLA - and to win their appeals of course. We are here because we all hate this scam of fake PCNs!

1. Yes definitely. Did you keep it - if so send POPLA a copy (keep the original). If not then mention it anyway as it shows good faith on your part that you did pay.

2. Definitely. Your circumstances sound ideal or being allowed longer than 28 days, because you didn't get the letter till last week. But don't hang about. Tell POPLA the reason why you are appealing now, like you explained it above.

3. Pics of the parking signs will help if they are flawed, unclear, missing? Or if the alleged situation of a 'fluttering ticket' isn't stated?

4. Just copy this sort of wording linked below, I am not legally qualified but I just find law interesting, have an eye for detail I reckon, and I like this sort of thing! IMHO my post #126 covers the two points (separate points) about lack of ownership/title (important point on its own) and also requiring the PPC to show the contract they have to have with the owner/occupier - say you want it produced 'because you think it doesn't comply with the BPA code of practice on contracts':

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2273989

5. Yep, why not, it was wholly disproportionate as there was no loss to the landowner/occupier, the only party with whom you could have had a contract as you were allowed/invited to park there having bought a ticket. A third party PPC cannot have made any loss, this is clearly all about profiteering, especially as they have not made the P&D tickets sticky, for ease of displaying. Also unfair contract under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, so any alleged contract is null and void.

6. You don't have to use mulronie's wording at all - and if you don't understand any points then lose them from your draft!



I'd recommend you show us what you want to send to POPLA tomorrow.

Make sure your first paragraph is explaining the delay, then second paragraph explaining the fluttering ticket situation (a well-known situation with tickets that are not sticky). Then the lack of ownership in the car park, no legal standing to make contracts or allege trespass/loss, as per VCS -v- HMRC (do cite it), then you think their contract is not BPA code-compliant, so you require them to produce it to POPLA, then disproportionate charge = a penalty, certainly no loss, and breach of those laws as mentioned.