Assigned Residents Space Without Displayed Permit

hoohoo

+1 to coupon mad. You must do this online now. Xmas post means you may miss the deadline.

blawford

I was intending on appealing online rather than post, I assume I still needed to fill in the form they sent and supply it to them? I have scanned and used paint to fill it in and will pdf and attach it along with everything else.

I will send before the end of the day with the changes you mentioned. Many thanks again, I will come back with the result.

Redx

blawford wrote: »

I was intending on appealing online rather than post, I assume I still needed to fill in the form they sent and supply it to them? I have scanned and used paint to fill it in and will pdf and attach it along with everything else.

I will send before the end of the day with the changes you mentioned. Many thanks again, I will come back with the result.

do both if you feel its necessary, the main point is to get it there, doesnt matter how , you could even mention online you are posting it as well

blawford

I just sent the appeal via email, I listed all of the attachments in the body of the email and said what each of them was, just in case any of them get cut off by their system or they claim they didn't receive any of them. I also said that I would like an acknowledgement of receipt of my appeal and that I could provide any of the files again if different formats if necessary.

I will follow up with them before the 28 day window closes if I don't hear back from them, to make sure the appeal has been received.

blawford

Received a reply today with acknowledgement of my appeal and that it will be judged on or shortly after the 28th January.

I will be back then to let you know the outcome.

blawford

The Operator issued parking charge notice number [removed]
arising out of the presence at [removed], on 22 May 2013, of a
vehicle with registration mark [removed].

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.

Many thanks to everyone who helped me with this... I will post more details in the next post.

Redx

please post up a redacted copy (no personal details) with the assessor name in the successful popla appeals sticky thread

thanks

and well done

blawford

Bit disappointed that it was won on such a tedious point! At least it is over with though! Here are the full details, will also post it on the sticky.

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

The Operator issued parking charge notice number [removed] arising out of the presence at [removed], on 22 May 2013, of a vehicle with registration mark [removed]. The Operator recorded that the vehicle was parked in a residents parking space without clearly displaying a valid residents parking permit.

The Appellant has made various representations; I have not dealt with them all as I am allowing this appeal on the following ground.

The Appellant has made representations, alluding to the case of Vehicle Control Services Limited - and - The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC) the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) where it was held that without landowner rights of possession, they cannot make a contract with a driver using this facility. The Appellant submits
that the Operator does not have this authority.

The Operator rejected the representations, because The Operator submits that they have authority from the landowner to issue parking charge notices at the site.

The case of VCS v HMRC concerned Value Added Tax but, In Paragraph 46 of the Decision, it states:

VCS is permitted under the contract [with the landowner] to collect and retain all fees and charges from parking enforcement action.

This case has now been considered by the Court of Appeal ([2013] EWCA Civ 186) where, in allowing the appeal of VCS, the Court held:

In the present case the contract between VCS and the landowner gives VCS the right to eject trespassers. That is plain from the fact that it is entitled to tow away vehicles that infringe the terms of parking. The contract between VCS and the motorist gives VCS the same right. Given that the motorist has accepted a permit on terms that if the conditions are broken his car is liable to be towed away, I do not consider that it would be open to a motorist to deny that VCS has the right to do that which the contract says it can. In order to vindicate those rights, it is necessary for VCS to have the right to sue in trespass. If, instead of towing away a vehicle, VCS imposes a parking charge I see no impediment to regarding that as damages for trespass.

The material events occurred before the coming into force of Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. However, it is clear that, subject to the terms of the contract between them and the landowner, an operator may issue a parking charge notice to a vehicle for a breach of conditions of parking.

Membership of the Approved Operator Scheme does require the parking company to have clear authorisation from the landowner (if the Operator is not the landowner) to manage and enforce parking. This is set out in the British Parking Association Code of Practice. Therefore the Operator is likely to have authority to issue parking charge notices. However, as with any issue, if the point is specially raised by an appellant, then the operator should address it by producing such evidence as they believe refutes a submission that they have no authority. A copy of the written authority the Operator submits they have from the landowner has not been produced.

Therefore, having carefully considered all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, the Operator has not shown that they have authority from the landowner to issue parking charge notices. As the Appellant submits that the Operator does not have authority, the burden of proof shifts to the Operator to prove otherwise. The Operator has not discharged this burden.

Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

Amber Ahmed
Assessor

Redx

typical of these PPC`s to attest that they have the relevant written contractual authority, yet consistently fail to produce it in writing !

reminds me of the range at barrow in that recent transcript posted on here this week

I will never understand why they keep on issuing these details and pcn,s and court cases if its obvious that they have no watertight contracts to back it up

4consumerrights

Well done Blawford - if you get another one though - you may like to raise a counterclaim against UKPC