POPLA Decisions

Stroma

A win against VCS

Katybelle_D wrote: »

Update:

I am pleased to let you know that we won at POPLA!!! Absolutely over the moon. Thank you to everyone who has assisted and supported and advised. In particular Coupon mad, Stroma and Umkomaas. You all do a wonderful job on here and it is all done from the goodness of your heart and concern of others. Thank you :-)

Copy of letter received from POPLA:

(Appellant)

-v-

Vehicle Control Services Limited (Operator)

The Operator issued parking charge notice number xxx arising

out of the presence at Listerhills Science Park car park, on xxx, of a vehicle with registration mark xxx.

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


It is the Operator’s case that the parking charge notice was issued for parking



in a restricted area. The Operator submits that a parking charge is now due in

accordance with the clearly displayed terms of parking.

The Appellant makes a few submissions but I will only be deciding this appeal on the following; the Appellant has submitted that the parking charge does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of the Operator’s loss, and so is not enforceable.

The signage produced seems to indicate that the charge represents damages for a breach of the parking contract. Accordingly, the charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The onus is on the Operator to prove its case on the balance of probabilities.

Accordingly, as the Appellant submits that the parking charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, the onus is on the Operator to produce some explanation or evidence to tip the balance in its favour. The Operator has produced a statement which it submits justifies the charge as a pre-estimate of loss; however, I am not minded to fully accept this justification.

The Operator must show that the charge sought is a genuine estimate of the potential loss caused by the parking breach, in this case, the Appellant’s failure to purchase a valid ticket. The Operator has produced a list of costs; however, this sum includes a large proportion under the undiscounted stage which has not been a loss to the Operator yet/ and may not be. I do not accept that the parking charge substantially amounts to a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

Accordingly, I allow the appeal.


Marina Kapour



Assessor

dollypeeps

NCP Refused Appeal - dollypeeps

Below is the allowed appeal letter from POPLA (sorry cant find how to link it to original post)

Appellant v NCP Limited Operator

The operator issued parking charge notice XXxxxxxxxx arising out of the presence at Xxxxxxx Station on xx/xx/2013 of a vehicle registration mark XXxx XXX.

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 assessors reasons are as set out.

The operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

Reasons for the assessors determination

At xx.xx pm on xx/xx/2013 a parking operative observed the appellants vehicle at the Xxxxxxx car park.

The operators case is that the appellant breached the car parking conditions by parking in a pay and display car park without displaying a pay and display ticket.

The appellant made representations stating her case. The appellant raised a number of points one of them was that there was no loss to the operator and the charge must only reflect a genuine pre estimate of loss.

The appellant has submitted that the parking charge does not reflect the operators loss and so is not enforceable. The operator has not addressed this submission.

It appears to be the appellants case that the parking charge represents a sum for specified damages in other words compensation agreed in advance. Accordingly the charge must represent a genuine pre estimate of the loss caused by the alleged breach.

The operator does not appear to dispute that the sum represents damages and has not attempted to justify the charge as a genuine pre estimate of loss.

Consequently I have no evidence before me to refute the appellants submission that the parking charge in unenforceable.

I need not decide any other issues.

Accordingly the appeal is allowed.

Sakib Chowdhury
Assessor

Smallsteps123

18 February 2014
Reference 6063453048
always quote in any communication with POPLA
XXXXXX (Appellant)
-v-
ParkingEye Ltd (Operator)
The Operator issued parking charge notice number XXXXX
arising out of a presence on private land, of a vehicle with registration
mark XXXXX
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.
2 19 February 2014
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued
incorrectly.
The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any
evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any
evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.
Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.
Chris Adamson
Assessor

BenCr

Decision: Allow
Operator: Excel Parking Services Limited
Assessor: Shehla Pirwany
Decision Date: 25th Feb 2014

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination:
It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.

The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

janh_2

I had my appeal against parking eye allowed - same assessor & same wording as Smallsteps123 above

Many thanks for help received from this site & pepipoo

Redx

win against PE here Brent south retail park

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4842610

Hi Guys,

I just want to say you are amazing and thank you so much for all your support

I just heard back from POPLA and my appeal has been successful.

They have now cancelled the ticket. Below are the full details:



PARKINGON PRIVATELANDAPPEALS



***** (Appellant)

-v-

ParkingEye Ltd (Operator)


The Operator issued parking charge notice number ******** arisingout of a presence on private land, of a vehicle with registration mark *****.


The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.

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

The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.


The Operator should now cancel the parking charge noticeforthwith.


Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

Itis the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.


TheOperator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidenceto show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence thatshows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

AccordinglyI have no option but to allow the appeal.

Redx

win against Excel - a retail park and also Asda mentioned

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4800583&page=2 post #33

Hi All - just wanted to update to say that I did send of my POPLA Appeal AGES ago (feel's like ages ago anyway!) I had a reply saying I would hear a decision on or around the 11th Feb and only just heard today

Quote:
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be ALLOWED.

The Assessors reasons are as set out.

The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

REASONS FOR THE ASSESSOR'S DETERMINATION

It is the Appellant's case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.

The operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occured, nor any evidence that shows what that conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal
So I am reading that as Excel Parking not even bothering to send any thing in relating to the appeal so in theory not contesting my appeal!?

Either way WIN WIN for me!

YEY - Big thanks to all the guys on here who offered me (and others) advice and help!!

bob?_3-2

Sleepless nights for the PPC's. Ha Ha.

bod1467

That's several in a row where the PPC have simply thrown in the towel at POPLA and not sent an evidence pack.

bazster

bob? wrote: »

Sleepless nights for the PPC's. Ha Ha.

Hardly. 1.1% of cases are appealed to PoPLA of which 45% are upheld. And if you consider that at least half of those wouldn't have been paid anyway, PoPLA is costing the PPC's less than one-quarter of one percent of cases. It's business as usual with the other 99.75%.