Sneaky ticket

billybumble

Thanks. I've decided yes to appeal. I found out on Tuesday, the baby had no heartbeat, I sat a 4 hour child development exam on the Friday, started haemorrhaging on Saturday. I did that in tribute to the miracle and I do feel like I am broken and bonkers. However, I was pregnant at the time that man 'duped' me and the stress they put on me might not be a direct cause but all this certainly hasn't helped.
I have looked at links just now and templates and the signs aren't compliable with BPA guidelines and I found lots I can copy and paste. However, I will hang back and follow advice and don't mind putting in work. It won't do my self worth any good to pay - last time I panicked and didn't wait for advice, I had everything to lose and was trying not to get stressed. This time I have 28days and nothing left to lose. I will work with any help I can get and appreciate it very much.
Thank you

billybumble

Hi Guys Dad , yes that makes perfect sense. I would be more than happy for that, it would be great. If you want to help me, I will gladly except. Being factual is hard when your emotions are all over. Tell me what to, what to read and I will do it.

Half_way

Ive recently been blessed with a little nephew, and I cant imagine the pain and loss, your friends and family and of course you are feeling right now.
Although web forums such as this cant offer you a physical shoulder to cry on, we can try and guide you through this parking ticket issue thing and make it one less thing to worry/get upset about.

a few questions about the parking ticket....
Most parking companies do not own the land, they are just contractors operating on behalf of someone else such as a supermarket chain/ landowner group ( such as savills for example)
Was this car park part attached to a single store such as a supermarket?
part of a retail park with various retailers present?
or a stand alone car park with no retailers attached?

The logic behind this is that UKCPS are just agents acting on behalf and for the land owner ( the principle) - if you can find the landowner/car park owner then this whole thing should be easily stopped as the principle is reasonable for the actions of its agents.
It may also be possible to wring out a little bit of good from all of this by telling the landowner that if they call off UKCPS and make a reasonable donation to the charity Tommys then you will not take legal action against the landowner/car park owner.
If your feeling up to it then an article in the press/media may be useful as well.


Tommys: information here
http://www.tommys.org/page.aspx?pid=247

bod1467

Just a thought about another possible bullet ... would the fact the OP was pregnant at the time of the "offence" mean the Equality Act 2010 could come into play?

billybumble

Hi,
It is attached to a health centre in the city centre, that would only be used in the day, not the evening. I parked in the evening. I don't know if the health centre is directly anything to do with the car park. It's a permit holders car park not a pay and display.

Words can't express what I feel right now, I know friends have been though I thought I had an idea but I really didn't. I don't even feel like me anymore. I am pretty raw re anything baby, so do not feel I can read anything on that website just yet but in time I will. Thank you.

Guys_Dad

billybumble wrote: »

Hi Guys Dad , yes that makes perfect sense. I would be more than happy for that, it would be great. If you want to help me, I will gladly except. Being factual is hard when your emotions are all over. Tell me what to, what to read and I will do it.

OK. Here is a draft appeal that I want other regulars to comment on. I have lifted bits from recent short appeals and comments and added my own tweaks.

Please, guys, if you want to make changes to this one, no problem, just try to keep the appeal simple for OP at this time in her life. We want this one to win.

PCN No.
Issued.
POPLA Reference xxxxxxxxxx
My Address
Todays Date

Dear POPLA,

I am the registered keeper of vehicle reg xxx xxxx and I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge. I wish to appeal against the PCN notice on the following grounds.

1) Lack of BPA compliant signage

The driver entered the car park in question, enquired from UKCPS parking attendant on duty where they could park and was directed to an area that had no signage restricting parking whatsoever. As Registered keeper, I put UKCPS to strict proof to show any BPA compliant signage in the area in which the car was parked.

2) The charge is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss'.

The charge demanded far exceeds the cost to the landowner who would have received £0.00 from any vehicles parked as the car park is free to use. If it exceeds any loss, it becomes a penalty.

In the appeal, UKCPS did not address this issue, and has not justified their charge as an appropriate pre-estimate of loss.
For this charge to be justified a full breakdown of the losses that UKCPS has suffered as a result of the car being parked at the car park is required and should add up to the amount demanded. Normal expenditure the company incurs to carry on their business (e.g. provision of parking, parking enforcement or signage erection) should not be included in the breakdown, as these operational costs are the normal costs of running a business and would have been suffered irrespective of the car being parked at that car park or not. I therefore put UKCPS to strict proof to provide a breakdown to POPLA of the actual losses that they claim to have suffered as a result of this alleged parking contravention

3) Proprietary Interest
As the registered keeper, I do not believe that UKCPS has demonstrated a proprietary interest in the land, because they have no legal possession which would give them any right to offer parking spaces, let alone allege a contract with third party customers of the lawful owner/occupiers.

In addition, UKCPS' lack of title in this land means they have no legal standing to allege trespass or loss, if that is the basis of their charge

4) Contract with Landowner
The registered keeper believes there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles them to levy these charges and to pursue them in the courts in their own name as creditor. Therefore this Operator has no authority to issue BPA Code of Practice compliant parking charge notices (PCNs). Any breach of the BPA Code of Practice means that 'registered keeper liability' has not been established, since full compliance is a pre-requisite of POFA 2012.''

I put UKCPS to strict proof that they have such a contract and that they are not in breach of section 7.1 of the BPA code


These are my appeal points and I request POPLA to uphold my appeal.

Give the team 24 hours to make their changes, then either get a printed copy and send it to POPLA by post, or if you feel strong enough, complete the on line appeal.

Umkomaas

GD - brilliant, thanks for stepping in so quickly. I've been at the gym and just got back, intending to crack on with this. I've just added one word (in red) to your input and added a paragraph on Business Rates which I believe PPCs should be addressing, even if it's just something else to they have to work on (cage rattler). Other than that this is great.

But I'm wondering whether Coupon can deliver a coup de gras paragraph on the Equality angle,then it's all set to go.

Guys_Dad wrote: »

OK. Here is a draft appeal that I want other regulars to comment on. I have lifted bits from recent short appeals and comments and added my own tweaks.

Please, guys, if you want to make changes to this one, no problem, just try to keep the appeal simple for OP at this time in her life. We want this one to win.

PCN No.
Issued.
POPLA Reference xxxxxxxxxx
My Address
Todays Date

Dear POPLA,

I am the registered keeper of vehicle reg xxx xxxx and I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge. I wish to appeal against the PCN notice on the following grounds.

1) Lack of BPA compliant signage

The driver entered the car park in question, enquired from UKCPS parking attendant on duty where they could park and was directed to an area that had no signage restricting parking whatsoever. As Registered keeper, I put UKCPS to strict proof to show any BPA compliant signage in the area in which the car was parked.

2) The charge is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss'.

The charge demanded far exceeds the cost to the landowner who would have received £0.00 from any vehicles parked as the car park is free to use. If it exceeds any loss, it becomes a penalty.

In the appeal, UKCPS did not address this issue, and has not justified their charge as an appropriate , genuine pre-estimate of loss.
For this charge to be justified a full breakdown of the losses that UKCPS has suffered as a result of the car being parked at the car park is required and should add up to the amount demanded. Normal expenditure the company incurs to carry on their business (e.g. provision of parking, parking enforcement or signage erection) should not be included in the breakdown, as these operational costs are the normal costs of running a business and would have been suffered irrespective of the car being parked at that car park or not. I therefore put UKCPS to strict proof to provide a breakdown to POPLA of the actual losses that they claim to have suffered as a result of this alleged parking contravention

3) Proprietary Interest
As the registered keeper, I do not believe that UKCPS has demonstrated a proprietary interest in the land, because they have no legal possession which would give them any right to offer parking spaces, let alone allege a contract with third party customers of the lawful owner/occupiers.

In addition, UKCPS' lack of title in this land means they have no legal standing to allege trespass or loss, if that is the basis of their charge

4) Contract with Landowner
The registered keeper believes there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles them to levy these charges and to pursue them in the courts in their own name as creditor. Therefore this Operator has no authority to issue BPA Code of Practice compliant parking charge notices (PCNs). Any breach of the BPA Code of Practice means that 'registered keeper liability' has not been established, since full compliance is a pre-requisite of POFA 2012.''

I put UKCPS to strict proof that they have such a contract and that they are not in breach of section 7.1 of the BPA code

5) Business Rates

As this free car park is now being used for the purpose of running a business, which is entirely separate from any other business the car park services, and generates revenue and profit for UKCPS, the registered keeper does not believe that UKCPS has declared the running of their business venture at this location to the Local Valuation Office and Local Authority for the payment of Business Rates.

I put UKCPS to strict proof that they have so registered the business they are operating at xxxxx car park with the Valuation Office and to provide proof that Business Rates are being paid to the Local Authority, or to provide proof or explanation of their exemption from such Business Rates.



These are my appeal points and I request POPLA to uphold my appeal.

Give the team 24 hours to make their changes, then either get a printed copy and send it to POPLA by post, or if you feel strong enough, complete the on line appeal.

bod1467

Either stay with Registered Keeper or stay with I, don't switch. (The edit for point 5 switches from I to RK at "the registered keeper does not believe that UKCPS has declared").

Minor point I agree.

Umkomaas

bod1467 wrote: »

Either stay with Registered Keeper or stay with I, don't switch. (The edit for point 5 switches from I to RK at "the registered keeper does not believe that UKCPS has declared").

Minor point I agree.

I've followed the same convention that GD has used in the 4 preceding appeal points. I made a deliberate attempt to do that.

We need to get this to flow as one appeal on submission rather than an over obvious joining together of various contributions. So have another read through and do say where you think it might not 'hang together'.

Happy to take any redrafting of my paragraph.

bod1467

I'm happy with the whole thing, other than saying "registered keeper" at that part of point 5. (The document has already established that the writer is the RK. That's why I'd use I at that part).