Exit blocked by CMS parking attendant to give me "ticket"

Guys_Dad

Where you may have a little difficulty stems from your first post.

PPCs read this forum regularly. Your first post clearly indicates that you left the site and went for a sandwich. Your POPLA letter - a good one - refers to grace periods, which are for the purpose of deciding whether or not to accept the parking conditions or for time to get out after the allowed time has expired.

I would not be surprised if the PPC quoted from this forum as your appeal is easily identifiable and they may seek to undermine your truthfulness in their case.

Having said that, this should not undermine your main point of being illegally detained. Just be careful what you post.

hoohoo

Agree with dropping anything that contradicts your first post. Your case is incredibly strong without it anyway.

I would add something like this on signage. You don't really need it, but there's no harm in putting the operator to a lot of work if they were stupid enough to give you a POPLA code when their warden tried to ticket a moving vehicle:

The signage is not compliant with the BPA code of practice. No signs are visible at the entrance. I require the Operator to show that their signs conform to all the requirements of the BPA code of practice, in terms of letter height, design requirements, sign colour, contrast and illumination, car park coverage, and standard wording. Where the operator signage differs from the BPA code of practice, I require a statement explaining why the operator thinks they are justified in not complying.

I also require a statement from the operator on whether they are or are not intending changing their signage in the future, and if they are, to provide all information on this, including the appropriate sections from the codes of works which must have been submitted to the BPA by 1 April 2013 for entrance signage and 1 September 2012 for other signage.

msarim

hoohoo wrote: »

Agree with dropping anything that contradicts your first post. Your case is incredibly strong without it anyway.

I would add something like this on signage. You don't really need it, but there's no harm in putting the operator to a lot of work if they were stupid enough to give you a POPLA code when their warden tried to ticket a moving vehicle:

The signage is not compliant with the BPA code of practice. No signs are visible at the entrance. I require the Operator to show that their signs conform to all the requirements of the BPA code of practice, in terms of letter height, design requirements, sign colour, contrast and illumination, car park coverage, and standard wording. Where the operator signage differs from the BPA code of practice, I require a statement explaining why the operator thinks they are justified in not complying.

I also require a statement from the operator on whether they are or are not intending changing their signage in the future, and if they are, to provide all information on this, including the appropriate sections from the codes of works which must have been submitted to the BPA by 1 April 2013 for entrance signage and 1 September 2012 for other signage.

Thanks for your advice. The problem is that in my original appeal to the PPC, they denied that I was blocked in and I dont have any photographs or witnesses to prove otherwise so I don't know whether that would be enough of an excuse.

The_Slithy_Tove

msarim wrote: »

Thanks for your advice. The problem is that in my original appeal to the PPC, they denied that I was blocked in and I dont have any photographs or witnesses to prove otherwise so I don't know whether that would be enough of an excuse.

Of course you keep on about being blocked in. It happened. When did lack of evidence ever stop a PPC (e.g. claiming someone left site, and therefore deserved a ticket)?

Coupon-mad

msarim wrote: »

Thanks for your advice. The problem is that in my original appeal to the PPC, they denied that I was blocked in and I dont have any photographs or witnesses to prove otherwise so I don't know whether that would be enough of an excuse.

No it won't be enough on its own but we are not suggesting it will be. You also need to add something about breach of the signage requirements in the BPA Code of Practice, with details, but apart from that you've clearly done some homework and that appeal looks far from 'cobbled together!' It's not about excuses or 'appeals'.

msarim

Coupon-mad wrote: »

No it won't be enough on its own but we are not suggesting it will be. You also need to add something about breach of the signage requirements in the BPA Code of Practice, with details, but apart from that you've clearly done some homework and that appeal looks far from 'cobbled together!' It's not about excuses or 'appeals'.

Just about to submit my appeal. Not sure which one of the 4 grounds of appeal mentioned on the POPLA form, apply to me?

The_Slithy_Tove

msarim wrote: »

Just about to submit my appeal. Not sure which one of the 4 grounds of appeal mentioned on the POPLA form, apply to me?

#4. I am not liable for the parking charge. It's always #4.