POPLA Decisions

KeithP

Jamran said:

Decision

Unsuccessful

Assessor Name

Robert Andrews

Assessor summary of operator case

The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to the vehicle parking longer than the maximum period allowed.

@Jamran, do you have a thread about this?
If so, please provide a link to it in your above post.

Jamran

Hi. No. I didn’t create a thread about this. I read all the sticky etc and submitted the appeal. Thanks 

LDast

Jamran said:

The appellant also refers to section 21.5a as they feel the parking operator’s images do not include a date stamp in the images. Section 21.5a states, “The photographs must refer to and confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised. A date and time stamp should be included on the photograph”. Whilst I acknowledge PCN shows only images on the vehicle, the parking operator has shown the full images with the time stamp included. I am satisfied that these images meet the requirements of the BPA.

The photos provided on the NtK are "evidence" and the fact that they have been "altered" from the file copies by cropping, is a breach of 21.5a

You must not digitally or by other means alter images used as photographic evidence other than:
e) to blur faces or the VRMs of other vehicles in the image in accordance with your GDPR obligations; or
f) to enhance the image of the VRM for clarity, but not to alter the letters and numbers displayed.

But, hey ho, it's only a POPLA decision ands no binding consequences.

Coupon-mad

Jamran said:

Hi. No. I didn’t create a thread about this. I read all the sticky etc and submitted the appeal. Thanks 

Please add a dozen paragraph breaks to your POPLA post, as I won't be the only one who cannot bring myself to read a wall of text.

I'm afraid I never read POPLA Decisions pasted like that without lots of paragraph breaks added by the person posting.  Has to be readable not just copied & pasted.

Jamran

Done

Coupon-mad said:

Jamran said:

Hi. No. I didn’t create a thread about this. I read all the sticky etc and submitted the appeal. Thanks 

Please add a dozen paragraph breaks to your POPLA post, as I won't be the only one who cannot bring myself to read a wall of text.

I'm afraid I never read POPLA Decisions pasted like that without lots of paragraph breaks added by the person posting.  Has to be readable not just copied & pasted.

Coupon-mad

Thanks.  Yet more proof that POPLA are utterly clueless about the applicable statute law and are not fit for purpose.

The Assessor doesn't even understand the remedies available to consumers and thinks there is some anonymous 'appropriate party' which handles breaches of the law:

"The appellant has referred to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the “requirements for transparency”.

Private parking operators must comply with the BPA, PoFA and any valid case law and it does fall with POPLA’s remit to handle complaints regarding the Consumer Rights Act. If the appellant would like to take their compliant regarding this further, they could do so with the appropriate party."

claireburgess

I wanted to post here to try and help others as I've just won my appeal. Thanks so much to this forum for the help. 

The parking operator has issued the parking charge notice (PCN) due to not parked correctly within the markings of the bay or space.


The appellant has raised the following points from their grounds of appeal. • The operator has not shown that the individual it is pursuing was liable for the charge • No evidence of landowner authority • The signs in the car park are not clear, prominent, or legible, with insufficient notice of the sum, and are not visible from disabled parking spaces • They raise Parking Eye v Beavis After reviewing the operator’s evidence, the appellant reiterates their grounds of appeal. The appellant has provided 1. A pdf document containing their grounds The above evidence has been considered in making my determination.

I am allowing this appeal and will detail my reasoning below: When an appeal comes to POPLA, the burden of proof begins with a parking operator to demonstrate that a PCN has been issued correctly. In this case the charge was issued for not parking correctly within the markings of a bay or space. The British Parking Association (BPA) has a Code of Practice which set the standards its parking operators need to comply with. Section 16.2 of the Code states that parking operators must ensure at least one sign containing the terms of parking can be viewed without the driver needing to leave the vehicle, to allow drivers with a disability the option to make an informed decision on whether to park. On review of the parking operators’ evidence, it is clear they have signs placed around the car park, and specific signs placed around the disabled parking bays. However, the signs around the disabled bays simply state that only disabled badge holders can park in this area, and a valid blue badge must be clearly displayed. There is no mention that a disabled motorist would receive a PCN for not parking within a marked bay. I acknowledge this is listed on the main terms and conditions signage, but as per the Code, disabled motorists must be able to read a sign from their vehicle to decide if they wish to stay or go. All terms and conditions that the operator requires motorists to adhere to must be listed on all signs throughout the car park, including those displayed in the disabled parking areas. Whilst it is clear from the operator’s evidence that the appellant clearly parked outside of a marked bay, and I do not dispute this information is listed on the main terms and conditions signs. As the motorist is not warned on the disabled signs that they would receive a PCN for not parking wholly in a bay, I cannot be satisfied that the motorist was fully informed of the requirements, and the consequences of parking at this car park. I note other grounds of appeal have been raised, however as I have allowed the appeal on the above I did not feel they needed consideration.

Ronak_Dave

Hi everyone here, nice to see community help each other. In my case I made a mistake and appeal that to MET parking services. I attached screenshot.

As expected getting unsuccessful. Response as bellow.

Re: Parking Charge Notice Number AB29387206 (Vehicle: NUMBER)

Site: (1041) McDonald's South Harrow

Issue date: 14/05/2024

POPLA Verification Code: POPLA code

Thank you for your correspondence received in regards to the above parking charge.

The terms and conditions of parking are clearly stated on the signs prominently displayed around this site. These

include that parking is for customers whilst on the premises only and that there is a maximum permitted stay in this area

of 90 minutes. Your vehicle remained on site for longer than the maximum permitted stay therefore we believe the

charge was issued correctly and we are upholding it.

We appreciate that you were a customer at the time, however, the time limit applies to all motorists that visit the site.

We are confident there are sufficient signs at this location bringing the terms and conditions of parking to the attention of

motorists and it remains the driver's responsibility to check the signs where they park and comply with the terms and

conditions.

This decision, which has been based on the facts of the case and takes into account our consideration of any mitigating

circumstances, is our final decision. You have reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and you now have a

number of options:

Can anyone advice please how to process with above. Thank you in advance. 

Le_Kirk

POPLA decisions are not binding on the motorist.  See NEWBIE sticky for what happens next, debt collector letters (powerless), LBC/LOC - take notice and action (NEWBIE) N1 claim form - take notice and action.(NEWBIE).

Umkomaas

@Ronak_Dave That's not a POPLA decision, it's the rejection from the PPC. You need to use the POPLA code to appeal to POPLA. The NEWBIES FAQ Announcement, third post, will help you with that. Please don't reply on this thread until you receive a POPLA decision. Start your own new thread - if you haven't already done so - for any further help.