POPLA Decisions

Jed57

Ralph - many thanks for the tips and info - I'm new to all this!

NorwichCommuter

Initial Thread
hxxp://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5757183&highlight=ncp

Decision
Successful Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
Safoora Sagheer

Assessor summary of operator case
The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as the appellant parked without clearly displaying the required valid pay and display ticket and no other cashless parking payments detected.


Assessor summary of your case
The appellant states the dash app failed to process his booking correctly on two occasions. He was informed by the website that both the bookings had gone through successfully. He understood and believed he complied with NCP’s requirement to pay for parking, upon examination of the booking it stated it had been made for four hours parking time. The issue was reported to Dash by email, he received a response advising that the bookings were erroneous and the money will be refunded to him. He says the text on the sign was small and it was dark when he arrived on site. The appellant has provided evidence of the payments made.


Assessor supporting rational for decision
The terms and conditions at the site state “For the avoidance of doubt, if you choose to pay the parking tariff by using the pay by mobile service, the payment must be made at the time of parking your vehicle in the car park and in any event, before you leave you’re your vehicle in the car park.” There are signs placed at the entrance and throughout displaying the terms and conditions offered. There is helpline number on the signage to use if a motorist has any concerns about the site. The operator issued a PCN to the appellant as the appellant parked without clearly displaying the required valid pay and display ticket and no other cashless parking payments detected. The appellant states the dash app failed to process his booking correctly on two occasions. He was informed by the website that both the bookings had gone through successfully. He understood and believed he complied with NCP’s requirement to pay for parking, upon examination of the booking it stated it had been made for four hours parking time. The issue was reported to Dash by email, he received a response advising that the bookings were erroneous and the money will be refunded to him. He says the text on the sign was small and it was dark when he arrived on site. The appellant has provided evidence of the payments made. I note the appellant’s comments and the evidence provided to support their reason for parking at the site in question. I further note that the appellant was a genuine visitor to the site on the date of the event. Whilst I acknowledge the appellant states he experienced some faults using the Dash app to purchase parking, however, the operator has provided evidence that there was no valid payment made at the time the parking attendant issued a PCN. The onus is on the appellant to ensure a valid payment is made before leaving the vehicle parked. The appellant also had the opportunity to make a payment using the payment machine, therefore, the appellant could have purchased a valid payment if he was having an issue with the Dash app. In the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice, section 18.3 “signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including the parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving.” Section 18 of the BPA Code of Practice also explains, that signs “must be conspicuous and legible and written in intelligible language so that they are easy to see read and understand.” I consider that the photographic evidence show that the operator met the minimum standards set by the BPA by displaying clear and sufficient signage throughout the car park in clear view to motorists. The terms and conditions of the contract are outlined in the signage advertised at the car park. When assessing appeals we determine whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract offered. POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. By remaining parked the appellant has accepted the terms and conditions offered but failed to adhere to them. As such, I am satisfied the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly I must refuse this appeal.


My View
POPLA has completely ignored the fact that I was informed by the Dash booking system that my booking was successful and that I left my car in the car park believing that I had paid correctly. Any errors in this case were the fault of NCP's payment partner Dash. Not sure how much more of an open and shut case there could have been as they were presented with evidence that they seem to have accepted but then ignored. Almost as if they are in bed with the PPCs.
Let's see what an impartial person thinks if this ever gets to court.

beamerguy

Thus proving once again that POPLA don't live
in the real world and use assessors who do not
have a clue.

POPLA is getting very close to the IPC/IAS scam
Nearly a kangaroo court

It's all becoming very "Mickey Mouse" stuff now

Button_Moon

Local Parking Security (LPS) in Straford Upon Avon

DecisionSuccessful

Assessor Name *** ***

Assessor summary of operator case

The operator has failed to provide any evidence in relation to this Parking Charge Notice (PCN).

Assessor summary of your case

The appellant states that a compliant Notice to Keeper was never served, the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge, the signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking Spaces, there is no evidence of calibrated machinery and that they do not believe that the operator has authority from the landowner is issue PCNs on site.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

I note the appellant’s grounds of appeal in relation to this PCN. However, the operator has failed to provide any evidence for my consideration. Because of this, the operator has failed to prove that it issued the PCN correctly. Therefore, I am satisfied that the appellant’s grounds of appeal do not require any further consideration.

forum link below:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5731266

hodplc

Operator Name Smart Parking

DecisionUnsuccessful
Assessor NameSafoora Sagheer
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to insufficient paid time.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant states the correct fee was paid and a ticket was displayed in the vehicle. He states while entering the vehicle registration, his wife got confused and entered the second bit of the registration incorrectly. The appellant has provided a receipt of the ticket purchased.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The site operates Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR). The appellant’s vehicle registration, XXXX XXX, was captured entering the site at 4:42 and exiting at 5:00. The appellant remained at the site for a period of 18 minutes. The terms and conditions at the site state “Parking tariff applies 24 hours a day, Monday- Sunday. Motorists must enter their full, correct vehicle registration when sing the payment machine. Failure to comply with the terms & conditions will result in a Parking Charge of: £100.” There are signs placed at the entrance and throughout displaying the terms and conditions offered. There is helpline number on the signage to use if a motorist has any concerns about the site. The operator issued a PCN to the appellant due to insufficient paid time. The appellant states the correct fee was paid and a ticket was displayed in the vehicle. He states while entering the vehicle registration, his wife got confused and entered the second bit of the registration incorrectly. The appellant has provided a receipt of the ticket purchased. The operator has provided a copy of a system generated print out that shows that insufficient parking was purchased on the date of the event. I note the appellant’s comments and the evidence provided to support their reason for parking at the site in question. I further note that the appellant was a genuine visitor to the site on the date of the event. Whilst I acknowledge the appellant purchased parking time, however, this was under the vehicle registration “XXXX XXX” rather than the correct registration “XXXX XXX”. The terms and conditions of the contract are outlined in the signage advertised at the car park. When assessing appeals we determine whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract offered. POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. By remaining parked the appellant has accepted the terms and conditions offered but failed to adhere to them. As such, I am satisfied the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly I must refuse this appeal.

Why I am not happy
I am not happy with the decision as it is clear that correct parking fees has been paid and it has been acknowledged both by the PCN issuer and the accessor, but accessor have still declined my appeal purely because an honest mistake was made while entering the registration.

Seems like POPLA is just a rubber stamp and just validating the operator's decision. Can somebody tell me how to appeal against POPLA's decision or what happens if i dont pay the fine as I think any unbiased court will accept my appeal.

Fruitcake

hodplc wrote: »

Why I am not happy
I am not happy with the decision as it is clear that correct parking fees has been paid and it has been acknowledged both by the PCN issuer and the accessor, but accessor have still declined my appeal purely because an honest mistake was made while entering the registration.

Seems like POPLA is just a rubber stamp and just validating the operator's decision. Can somebody tell me how to appeal against POPLA's decision or what happens if i dont pay the fine as I think any unbiased court will accept my appeal.

This is how the scammers make their money.

Your next step is to ignore anything and everything now unless you get real court papers. If that happens, start back at the NEWBIES thread and learn how to beat this in court.

The_Deep

PoPLA think that this has damaged the PPC to the tune of £100. Judges usually take a different view.

beamerguy

The fly in the ointment at POPLA is ....
Assessor Safoora Sagheer

See post 2864 above, the same happened with NorwichCommuter

It would appear this assessor is useless and needs to be
retrained or explain how he/she reached such a ridiculous
decision.

Parking (Code of Practice) Bill 2017-19
Sir Geg Knight is heading this one

https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/parkingcodeofpractice.html

Another member on here contacted him with a complaint
about POPLA and his reply was very positive.

Sir Greg needs to know that POPLA appears to be acting
on behalf of parking companies and that POPLA is not
in the interests of the public

Jamboross

I have been sent a PCN by Smart Parking in Carlisle on Lowther Street. I was visiting as I stopped to grab a quick bite to eat at McDonalds as I was attanding a golf event through my work in Newcastle. I entered the car park and parked at the Iceland car park and paid a £1.00 at their machine which entitled me to an hours parking.
I returned 35 minutes later and left through the only exit in that car park and unfortunately I had tidied out my car on my return to Scotland and threw out the ticket unbeknown to me that they would then send me a PCN. It quite clearly says "No Exit".
I appealed the charge and it was thrown out by a Chris Markey who has also lied "saying that I arrived over an hour after" on the POPLA assessment and decision and never mentioned anything to do with the Iceland car park, machine nor my two witnesses in the car with me. This week I received a notice to pay £160 to Debt Recovery Plus Ltd and it had an option to call and speak to someone if I didn't think I am liable for the charge. I sent an e-mail to say I'd call on Saturday (today), but low and behold their office is now closed despite saying they are open until 4pm and I have until the 19th of January to reply. Now I have sent them two e-mails the last one I have photographed. My wife doesn't want this to go to court, and I very much doubt it will as an independent adjudicator would surely listen to the two witnesses that I had and check the Iceland parking machine as well. Ticket or no ticket, I paid £1 in a car park within theirs, have two witnesses who saw me doing it and I am not paying another pound to a company who are a downright scam.

KeithP

Jamboross, the best advice for you can be found in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

Have a read of that and if you still have questions then please start your own thread.

You mention Scotland. There is a section in post #1 of that NEWBIES thread which discusses Scotland.