Parking charge appeal allowed!

2ddesign

Hi All

Thank you very much, to those of you, that helped me win my appeal!:beer:

Here is the Assessor's Determination.

The Appellant submits that he paid for and displayed a valid ticket.

Amongst other grounds of appeal, the Appellant submitted that the parking charge must be genuine pre-estimate of loss so as to compensate the landholder for any likely loss suffered as a result of a breach to the parking contract. The Appellant submits that there was no loss as a result of the alleged breach and therefore the parking charge cannot be a genuine pre-estimate.

The signage produced in evidence by the Operator states that a PCN would be issued for “failure to adhere” with the parking conditions. The wording appears to indicate that the parking charge represents damages for a breach of the parking contract. Accordingly, the charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The estimate must be based upon loss flowing from a breach of the parking terms. This might be, for example, loss of parking revenue or even loss of retail revenue at a shopping centre.

The Operator failed to respond to this issue.

Consequently, I have no evidence before me to refute the Appellant’s submission that the parking charge is unenforceable.

I must allow the appeal on this ground.

Accordingly. It does not fail for me to decide any remaining issues.


Matthew Shaw

Assessor

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4492343

Guys_Dad

Excellent news and having read your original thread, was glad to see the help you received here was of some use. Results like this make the efforts that many of the regulars worthwhile.

This genuine pre-estimate of loss point seems to be quite a blow to the PPCs.


Hope you don't mind, but I have posted this on the POPLA DECISIONS sticky.

The_Slithy_Tove

It seems that many of the POPLA wins that we hear about succeed on the basis that the PPC offer no evidence to refute what the appellant claims, e.g. no rights to issue tickets, no evidence that charge reflects the loss.

I wonder if they'll start trying to submit such evidence (rather than the bundles of templates they currently send). Might be hard for them, as the contracts asked for probably don't exist. And I would love to see their evidence of a £100 loss to the landowner for breach of contract.

bazster

The only way they can get around the "genuine pre-estimate of loss" pitfall is to claim these are agreed charges rather than damages, which immediately plunges them into a minefield of problems with VAT and - as we are seeing recently - planning permission and business rates in the case of "free" car parks.

More likely they'll eventually just give up on POPLA and fall back onto the mugs who pay up without appealing.

nigelbb

Unless it was Martin Shaw doing a bit of moonlighting now that the Judge John Deed series has been cancelled I suspect that the assessor was in fact Matthew Shaw.

bod1467

I just assumed the POPLA people thought they were The Professionals.

nigelbb

BTW Well done OP. Your POPLA challenge is a good model for others to follow.

2ddesign

Hi changed the typo to Matthew:o

I received on the 18th of June a "Roxburghe Dept Collectors" letter asking for £154, just a few days before my appeal was won:mad:

So please do not pay the PCN charges perhaps "Martin Shaw"alias Matthew Shaw will "make your day"

2ddesign

Umkomaas

Good result 2ddesign, well done!

As a finale, why not report the Roxy attempt at extortion to the DVLA and BPA as recovery procedure should be suspended whilst a POPLA submission in under consideration.

Coupon-mad

2ddesign wrote: »

Hi changed the typo to Matthew:o

I received on the 18th of June a "Roxburghe Dept Collectors" letter asking for £154, just a few days before my appeal was won:mad:

So please do not pay the PCN charges perhaps "Martin Shaw"alias Matthew Shaw will "make your day"

2ddesign

Complain using the link on the BPA website about the AOS members (both of them, the PPC and Roxburghe as well who are also in the AOS) for sending that when the POPLA appeal was under consideration. Under the BPA Code they have to stop work on a case until after the POPLA decision is made.

Just one email is needed, with attachments showing the letter you received and the POPLA decision just a week or so later, complaining about both AOS members.

Kite2010

And keep an eye out in case Roxburghe send you more letters.

Ignoring a POPLA decision won't look good for them