POPLA Decisions

thegentleway

Umkomaas said:

@thegentleway - do you have a current thread with the evidence submitted by the PPC?

No I don't but happy to create one if you let me know what you info you need?

Umkomaas

thegentleway said:

Umkomaas said:

@thegentleway - do you have a current thread with the evidence submitted by the PPC?

No I don't but happy to create one if you let me know what you info you need?

Not particularly, I was wondering if there was one running. You do know there is no obligation on you to pay the PPC (not until a Judge instructs you to do so). Should the PPC issue a court claim, please open the new thread then so we can assist with you defending it. 

Which PPC please?  That might help to give you an indication as to how litigious they are.

thegentleway

Umkomaas said:

thegentleway said:

Umkomaas said:

@thegentleway - do you have a current thread with the evidence submitted by the PPC?

No I don't but happy to create one if you let me know what you info you need?

Not particularly, I was wondering if there was one running. You do know there is no obligation on you to pay the PPC (not until a Judge instructs you to do so). Should the PPC issue a court claim, please open the new thread then so we can assist with you defending it. 

Which PPC please?  That might help to give you an indication as to how litigious they are.

Yes indeed, I’m not paying them a penny.

It’s Parking Eye.

Umkomaas

thegentleway said:

Umkomaas said:

thegentleway said:

Umkomaas said:

@thegentleway - do you have a current thread with the evidence submitted by the PPC?

No I don't but happy to create one if you let me know what you info you need?

Not particularly, I was wondering if there was one running. You do know there is no obligation on you to pay the PPC (not until a Judge instructs you to do so). Should the PPC issue a court claim, please open the new thread then so we can assist with you defending it. 

Which PPC please?  That might help to give you an indication as to how litigious they are.

Yes indeed, I’m not paying them a penny.

It’s Parking Eye.

Hmmm. PE are normally working on an ANPR/time basis, where a contract can be more readily argued. That's not to say they don't operate on the basis on which they are pursuing you, but not the norm. 

If PE has the landowner's approval to sue through the courts and their NtK was PoFA compliant, they will sue, and you will quickly receive a LBCCC and a court claim via the Northampton CCBC. 

But, if you receive a debt collector letter (DCB Limited?), its odds on they don't have authority to proceed. 

Come back on a new thread if you receive any of the above. 

turgidstrop

POPLA Appeal Successful!  Thanks to everyone for your help.  Here is the original thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6207937/euro-car-park-pcn-received-for-rental-car#latest

Decision

Successful

Assessor Name

Adele Ditchfield

Assessor summary of operator case

The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as a valid pay and display/permit was not purchased.

Assessor summary of your case

I will be summarising the appellant’s grounds of appeal only. The appellant says the operator has not complied with the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 as the operator failed to provide a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle ire firm, a copy of the hire agreement and a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hire along with a notice to keeper, they say they did not receive these documents. The appellant says the operator does not have a valid contract with the landowner. They say the signage is not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the parking charge.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

The driver of the vehicle on the date in question has not been clearly identified. The operator is therefore pursuing the appellant for the charge as the hirer of the vehicle in line with the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012. POFA requires that when pursuing a parking charge from the hirer of a vehicle, an operator obtains from the keeper of the vehicle “a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement”, “a copy of the hire agreement” and “a copy of the statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.” POFA also requires that an operator issues a “notice to hirer” as well “a copy of the documents mentioned […] and the notice to keeper.” The operator has provided no evidence to show that the required documentation was obtained from the keeper or that it was sent to the hirer. It is not necessary to address the appellant’s remaining grounds of appeal. Upon consideration of the evidence provided to POPLA, I cannot determine the terms and conditions of the car park were breached. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued incorrectly. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.

Umkomaas

Upon consideration of the evidence provided to POPLA, I cannot determine the terms and conditions of the car park were breached. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued incorrectly. 

If the main thrust of the appeal was no hirer liability under PoFA because of the non-submission of the relevant hire documentation, where does the above statement come from. 

Anyways ..... well done @turgidstrop. 👍

RB2021

Hiya, just saw your response regarding: euro car park fine. My situation is similar - my car broke down in a spot that was not marked as bay within a petrol pump. I panicked and wrote to them in the hope that they would void the fine considering I broke down so a situation that could not be helped. It went to POPLA who decided the fine was still payable. This all occurred 7 months ago and they have only recently got back in touch with me due to covid. As it was so long ago, I forgot to mention that their signs are not even readable from a drivers perspective and also there were no clear bays. What do you suggest I do? I explained I didn’t have the money to pay. They are now directing me to citizen advice bureau but still require payment of £100 now. They also claim I was I was in their spot for 35 minutes - their proof was an image of me entering and leaving the petrol pump. This doesn’t mean I was in their spot for the whole duration. They dont accept this. I actually moved my car over to the type pump with the help of a man who was there at the same Time. I requested video footage but they didn’t have. Do I have a leg to stand on here? Sorry this sounds a mess but I’m really stressed out about it. I told them I was made redundant due to covid and barely have money for bills but they don’t care. Do you have any advice? Thank you in advance. 

Le_Kirk

Best thing to do is to read the NEWBIE sticky and then start your own thread with full details of your issue and then regulars can answer you without it getting tangled up with this thread which is all about POPLA decisions

stoem

Decision

Successful

Assessor Name

Gemma West

Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to parking without authorisation.

Assessor summary of your case

The appellant’s case is that the genuine customer exemption. The appellant questions the authority to issue parking charges. The appellant has questioned the leniency clause for first time offenders. The appellant states no contract between ParkingEye and the driver due to insufficient signage. The appellant has questioned Covid security. The appellant has provided evidence to support the appeal.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

It is a parking operator’s responsibility to demonstrate to POPLA that it has issued a parking charge notice correctly and that the parking charge is therefore owed. In the present case, the appellant has questioned genuine customer exemption When it comes to parking on private land, the signage plays a pivotal role in informing motorist of the terms and conditions of the contract. When entering a vehicle registration forms part of the terms of the parking contract, an error in entering the registration (for example missing a digit out, entering the wrong digit, or not entering the registration at all), is called a keying error. Keying errors are dealt with by the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice section 17. Section 17 of the BPA Code of Practice states “Technology is being used more and more by parking providers as an aid to car park management. Irrespective of whether a parking facility is off-street or on-street, the increased use of technology will often require a motorist to correctly enter their vehicle registration at a pay and display machine, parking kiosk or at a validation terminal inside the location in instances where parking is offered at a reduced rate or free of charge.” Not entering the registration at all is a major keying error. The British Parking Association states that when a major keying error has been identified, or if the motorist was a legitimate user of the site as the appellant was her), the operator should make: “a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period”, before reverting back to the previous charge amount. The operator in this case has not provided any evidence to suggest they offered the appellant the discounted rate of £20. Due to this, I am not satisfied that the operator has acted correctly during the appeals process. As a result of this, I am therefore unable to determine that the parking charge notice has been issued correctly. Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

Basically the driver went to Aldi, bought something on credit card, forgot to enter their reg details and got a fine. I submitted a copy of a credit card statement evidencing that the driver was a genuine customer. Parking Eye refused my appeal. 

POPLA essentially says that not entering your reg details at all is equivalent to a major keying error and that if the motorist was a legitimate user of the site (as the driver was here), the operator should make: “a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period”, before reverting back to the previous charge amount. 

Parking Eye, leeches as they are, didn't do that. Instead they sent me threatening letters and it is deeply satisfying that I caused them some costs for no return. I never told them who was driving but in a future incident should it reoccur it may well be my dad who lives in Germany who was the driver. For the lols. 

Coupon-mad

Wow, something new that we hadn't tried, in cases where people didn't see a keypad and so didn't key in their VRM.  Never thought about this relating to all keypads and not just pay & display machines but surely POPLA are correct (wow!):

Keying errors are dealt with by the British Parking Association’s Code of Practice section 17. Section 17 of the BPA Code of Practice states

 “Technology is being used more and more by parking providers as an aid to car park management.  Irrespective of whether a parking facility is off-street or on-street, the increased use of technology will often require a motorist to correctly enter their vehicle registration at a pay and display machine, parking kiosk or at a validation terminal inside the location in instances where parking is offered at a reduced rate or free of charge.”

Not entering the registration at all is a major keying error. The British Parking Association states that when a major keying error has been identified, or if the motorist was a legitimate user of the site as the appellant was her), the operator should make: “a modest charge to the motorist of no more than £20 for a 14-day period”, before reverting back to the previous charge amount. The operator in this case has not provided any evidence to suggest they offered the appellant the discounted rate of £20. Due to this, I am not satisfied that the operator has acted correctly during the appeals process. As a result of this, I am therefore unable to determine that the parking charge notice has been issued correctly. Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

That wording is also published by the BPA in their 'GetYourRegRight' campaign:

https://www.getyourregright.info/

So, a keying error relates to any VRM keypad situation.  Quite right too.  

Thankyou for posting this, @stoem because this gives us an extra defence point for court defences v BPA firms, too.  Great to see something new we hadn't considered and I am surprised we missed this...until now!