Coach bay fine from UKCPS

Cafcbrown

Hi all

I have had my "soft appeal" rejected by these cowboys, and they have replies with a 10 digit code, which I am guessing is a popla code.

I am looking for some help as to what to put into a letter to popla, as feel I have a strong case.

I have looked into the various thread on this, but am looking for some guidance as to what to write. I can post a draft letter , if that helps?

Many thanks

The_Slithy_Tove

Can't really suggest anything without knowing any of the circumstances of your original fake-PCN.

Best is to do some research, including the sticky threads on POPLA appeal wins. Also Custard Pie's (not yet) sticky on POPLA appeals is very handy: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4739845.

Then come back with your draft.

Coupon-mad

Cafcbrown wrote: »

Hi all

I have had my "soft appeal" rejected by these cowboys, and they have replies with a 10 digit code, which I am guessing is a popla code.

I am looking for some help as to what to put into a letter to popla, as feel I have a strong case.

I have looked into the various thread on this, but am looking for some guidance as to what to write. I can post a draft letter , if that helps?

Many thanks

See all the advice and examples here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/62180281#Comment_62180281

HTH, and yes we will be happy to check your draft to be sure it's watertight! But please just reply here with it, not another new thread or we can't follow your background story. I see you started out on this thread which you should have just replied on:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4642833

Choose a thread out of these two and stick to it, right through to when you post to tell us when you win at POPLA before Christmas!

Tilt

Your title mentions 'coach bay'. Can you expand on that please?

Coupon-mad

Tilt wrote: »

Your title mentions 'coach bay'. Can you expand on that please?

Exactly why the OP should have continued on his initial thread, which said:

''Hi guys, I understand disabled bays are not enforceable if on private land. Does the same apply if your alleged to have parked in a coach only bay, even though the lines aren't clearly marked in yellow, and there is no mention of coach parking bays on any of the signs?''

Tilt

Thanks but I would need to know where this was to be able to comment. Parking in coach bays at service areas is a bit of a hot potato between service areas and coach drivers who have to take statutory breaks. As such, they need parking facilities.

Cafcbrown

Hi

It was in a shopping outlet centre, not a service station

Thanks for all the replies , sorry I started this new thread, I will close the other thread down

Tilt

Which shopping centre?

Cafcbrown

Here is my current draft to Popla.
On the letter from UKCPS it states reason for issue "without a valid permit or authorityy" should i mention this anywhere in the letter? I have pictures of the signs and alledged parking bay, do i need to include these also?


POPLA appeal re UKPC ticket number xxxxxxxxxx

I am the registered keeper of the vehicle and this is my appealsummarised below. I am not liable for the parking charge and the vehicle wasnot improperly parked. As such, the parking 'charge' notice exceeded theappropriate amount.


UNCLEAR AND NON-COMPLIANT SIGNAGE


Due to their high position and the barely legible size of the smallprint, the signs in this car park are very hard to read and understand. Icontend that the signs and any core parking terms UKCPS LTD are relying uponwere too small for the driver to discern when driving in and that the signsaround the car park also fail to comply with the BPA Code of Practicerequirements . I request that POPLA should check the Operator's evidence andsignage map/photos on this point. I contend that the signs in that car park(wording, position, and clarity) do not comply and fail to properly warn/informthe driver of the terms and any consequences for breach (as in the case ofExcel Parking Services Ltd v Martin Cutts, 2011).


CONTRACT WITH THE LANDOWNER - NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE BPA CODE OFPRACTICE AND NO LEGAL STATUS TO OFFER PARKING OR ENFORCE TICKETS


UKCPS LTD does not own this car park and are acting merely as agents forthe owner/occupier.

In their Notices and in the rejection letter, UKCPS has not provided mewith any evidence that it is lawfully entitled to demand money from the driver,since they do not own nor have any interest or assignment of title of the landin question. I do not believe that the Operator has the necessary legalcapacity to enter into a contract with a driver of a vehicle parking in the carpark, or indeed to allege a breach of contract (as evidenced in the HigherCourt findings in VCS v HMRC 2012). I would require POPLA to check whetherUKCPS have provided a full copy of the actual contemporaneous, signed &dated site agreement/contract with the landowner/occupier (not just a signedslip of paper saying it exists) and check that it specifically enables thisOperator to pursue parking charges in the courts, and whether that contract iscompliant with the requirements set out in the BPA Code of Practice.
.


BPA CODE OF PRACTICE BREACH - NO 'CREDITOR' IDENTIFIED
The Notice I have received make it clear that UKCPS LTD is relying onSchedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. As such, there must bestrict compliance with all of its requirements in order to take advantage ofthe rights granted under that Act to pursue the registered keeper in respect ofa driver’s alleged 'charge'. UKCPS LTD has failed to comply in the wording oftheir Notice to Keeper since they have failed to identify the “Creditor”. Thismay, in law, be UKCPS LTD or indeed some other party. The Act requires a Noticeto Keeper to have words to the effect that “The Creditor is….”

The wording of Paragraph 9(2)(h) of Schedule 4 of the Act does notindicate that the “creditor must be named, but “identified”. The driver isentitled to know the identity of the party with whom he has allegedlycontracted and in failing to specifically identify the “Creditor”, UKCPS hasfailed to provide any evidence that it, or a third party, is entitled toenforce an alleged breach of contractual terms and conditions.



NO BREACH OF CONTRACT AND NO GENUINE PRE-ESTIMATE OF LOSS
UKCPS LTD are clearly attempting to enforce this charge under paragraphB 19.5 of the BPA Code of Practice and must be required to validate thisargument by providing POPLA with a detailed financial appraisal which evidencesthe genuine pre-estimated amount of loss or damages in this particular car parkfor this particular 'contravention'.

Since it is a free car park with the Operator receiving no other incomethan these 'charges' then UKCPS LTD cannot possibly expect POPLA or me tobelieve that they are operating at a permanent loss at this site. I contendthere has been no pre-estimate (prior to starting to 'charge forbreaches' at this site) prepared or considered in advance. There can have beenno loss arising from this non-event. Neither can UKCPS LTD lawfully includetheir operational day-to-day running costs in any 'loss' claimed.


UNLAWFUL PENALTY CHARGE
Since there was no demonstrable loss/damage and yet a breach of contracthas been alleged, this 'charge' can only be an unlawful attempt at dressing upa penalty to impersonate a parking ticket, as was found in the case of ExcelParking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman (2008) also OBServices v Thurlow(review, February 2011), in Parking Eye v Smith (Manchester County CourtDecember 2011) and UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012).

This transparently punitive charge by UKCPS LTD is a revenue-raisingexercise and is therefore unenforceable in law.


So in conclusion, I feel this is a revenue-raising scheme disguised as a'parking ticket' - so in fact it is an unenforceable penalty.

I respectfully request that this appeal be allowed.




Signed:

Dated:

Tilt

If you want advice/an opinion from me, I need to know the location or see images of it showing the signage (or the lack of it).

Cafcbrown

Hi

It was Chatham Dockside outlet, Kent