POPLA Decisions 9 March 2013 at 6:49PM edited 28 October 2016 at 9:29AM in Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking 3.9K replies 857K views

Umkomaas

Thanks for (part) update James. I'm not clear why the PPC being able to identify you via the case number should concern you. You're all done and dusted with them; they can do nothing further in your case, they can, effectively, go swivel.

No one else (other than POPLA) can have any access at all to your details via your case number.

I leave it entirely up to you, but being able to quote a ref no in future 'double-dipping' cases will definitely help other appellants. Thanks for coming back anyways.

d4nj0nes

Hi, I wanted to post my POPLA decision - This forum was a great help and source of information during the Appeal. Thanks to all who post.
Brief summary: Vs Uk Parking Limited, February 2015. I parked in Castle Car Park in Windsor. I Was 7 Minutes late to return to vehicle but didn't dispute this fact. They attempted to fine me £100. My ticket for two hours cost £6. I appealed mainly on the grounds of the amount being punitive and thanks to this forum also knew to throw in a request for proof that they have permission to issue tickets.
Hope this helps someone else. The real lesson for me is that despite the huge sense of injustice at the amount of the charge - it is the legal detail that will help your appeal and that you should focus on.
Anyway here is the decision:

Reference 1691035018
30 June 2015
Appelant
-v-
UK Parking Ltd

The Assessor ... has determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor's reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

Reasons for the Assessor's Determination

It is not in dispute that the appellant's vehicle was parked at the site and that a parking charge notice was issued after the operator's employee observed the vehicle and concluded that no valid pay and display ticket was displayed, as the ticket had expired.

The appellant made a number of representations. However, it is only necessary to deal with the one upon which I am allowing the appeal, that the operator lacks the authority to issue and enforce parking charge notices in respect of the land.

The operator rejected these representations on the question of authority, the operator stated that they had authority from the landowner for their activities.

Considering the evidence before me, I find that the operator has not provided any evidence that they have authority in respect of the site. The operator's assertion to that effect is insufficient to show that any authority has been granted. Accordingly, I cannot find that the operator had sufficient rights in the land to enter into contracts in respect of it. Therefore the parking charge notice cannot be held to be validly issued. In the light of this, I am not required to consider the other issues raised by the appellant.

Accordingly, the appeal must be allowed.
Christopher Monk.

Umkomaas

Well done on your result, and even more 'well done' on taking this forward based on NEWBIES sticky advice, rather than 'back and to' hand holding by regulars.

I think the comment from POPLA is very significant.

The operator rejected these representations on the question of authority, the operator stated that they had authority from the landowner for their activities.

Considering the evidence before me, I find that the operator has not provided any evidence that they have authority in respect of the site. The operator's assertion to that effect is insufficient to show that any authority has been granted. Accordingly, I cannot find that the operator had sufficient rights in the land to enter into contracts in respect of it

If you're up for it, I'd slap in two complaints:

1. To the DVLA, that on the basis the independent assessor (POPLA) has clearly determined that the PPC had no authority to enter into contracts with motorists, then they have unlawfully accessed your details and should be banned from access to any further data relating to parking at this venue. Ask, as a Freedom of Information request how many other motorists' details have been accessed in regard to this venue.

2. Similar complaint to the BPA that this PPC is in flagrant breach of their CoP (issuing tickets where they have no authority - as confirmed by POPLA) and ask that sanction points are awarded against them - 10 points for this breach I think. It's '12 points and out' for the more miscreant PPCs!

Mr_Stroopwafel

I cannot thank you enough for the help, this is a massive relief. Very pleased!

(Appellant)
-v-
ParkingEye Ltd (Operator)

The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.

The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.


The appellant has made various submissions; I have not dealt with them all as I am allowing this appeal on the following ground.
The appellant’s case is that the operator does not have authority to issue and pursue parking charge notices.

After reviewing the evidence I find that the operator has not provided a copy of a contract between them and the landowner and that neither has the operator provided a signed witness statement by the landowner which gives the operator the authority to issue and pursue parking charge notices.

Therefore, having carefully considered all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that on this particular occasion, the operator has not shown that they have authority from the landowner to issue and pursue parking charge notices. As the appellant submits that the operator does not have this authority, the burden is on the operator to prove otherwise. I find that the operator has not discharged this burden.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

Amber Ahmed
Assessor

stupotseb

XXX July 2015
Reference XXXXXXXXXXXX
always quote in any communication with POPLA
XXXXXXX (Appellant)
-v-
UK Parking Control Limited (Operator)
The Operator issued parking charge notice number XXXXXXXXXXX arising out of the presence at Stevenage Leisure Park, on XXX January 2015, of a vehicle with registration mark XXXXXXX.
The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.
XXXXXXX XXX July 2015
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
It is not in dispute that the appellant parked at the site without displaying a valid permit and received a parking charge notice after the operator’s employee observed this.
The appellant made a number of representations. However, it is only necessary to deal with the one upon which I am allowing the appeal, that the operator lacks the authority to issue and enforce parking charge notices in respect of the land.
The operator rejected these representations. On the question of authority, the operator stated that they had authority from the landowner for their activities.
Considering the evidence before me, I find that the operator has not provided sufficient evidence that they have authority from the landowner to issue and enforce parking charge notices in respect of the site. The witness statement produced by the operator is insufficient to show that any authority has been granted, as it does not name the landowner, so does not make it possible to see from whom the authority ultimately flows. Accordingly, I cannot find that the operator had sufficient rights in the land to enter into contracts in respect of it. Therefore the parking charge notice cannot be held to be validly issued. In the light of this, I am not required to consider the other issues raised by the appellant.
Accordingly, the appeal must be allowed.
Christopher Monk
Assessor

thegentleway

Thank you for everyone's help:

blankers

Hi All

Using the tips from the Newbies thread and other cases that had been successful I sent my appeal to POPLA and have been successful!

Details below

The Operator issued parking charge notice number 0000000000 arising out of the presence at Aldi, on 22 February 2015, of a vehicle with registration mark XXNNXXX

The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.

The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.

The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.

The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

On 26 February 2015, the appellant was issued with a parking charge notice for breaching the terms and conditions of the parking site.

The appellant has made a number of submissions. However, I will elaborate only on the one submission that I will be allowing this appeal on namely that the operator does not have the authority to issue the parking charge notice.

As the appellant has disputed the operator’s authority to issue the parking charge notice, the burden is on the operator to prove otherwise. However, in consideration of all the evidence before me I find that the operator has not submitted any evidence to prove that they had the authority to issue the parking charge notice. On this occasion, I am not satisfied that the operator has discharged the burden.

Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

Farah Ahmad

Assessor

Thanks for the help - still waiting to hear about an older one, fingers crossed

trisontana

Could you tell us the name of the PPC?

Queenieviolet

I have heard (via social media) that if you do not appeal a fine at the time and then try later with POPLA that the court will rule that the fine must be paid. This was advice given by a solicitor. Any views? Currently my fine is a couple of years old but it would appear UKCPS are writing again to old fines following the new case law.

trisontana

Queenieviolet wrote: »

I have heard (via social media) that if you do not appeal a fine at the time and then try later with POPLA that the court will rule that the fine must be paid. This was advice given by a solicitor. Any views? Currently my fine is a couple of years old but it would appear UKCPS are writing again to old fines following the new case law.

It would be best if you start you own thread. BTW , these are not fines, they are invoices