Vehicle Control Services - POPLA time

Olivier

Coupon-mad wrote: »

There are loads of already-written POPLA appeals which are on other recent threads. Easily found by searching 'VCS' or 'Airport' or 'relevant' as keywords. Here's one I suggested the other day:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/63815981#Comment_63815981


HTH, feel free to plagiarise but not copy exactly, make it less of a template!

Thank you.

I've started a letter based on another template but will also ensure all elements of that answers are present.

Olivier

How about this text then...

(plagiarised from Coupon-Mad's suggestion)

**********************
Dear POPLA
Re verification code xxxxxxxxxx

As the registered keeper I wish my appeal to be considered on the following grounds.

1) Amount demanded is a penalty not a genuine pre estimate of loss
2) Not relevant Land under POFA 2012; no registered keeper liability
3) No landowner contract nor legal standing to form contracts or charge drivers
4) No Contract with driver
5) Misleading and unclear signage
6) Non-compliant ANPR 'hidden camera van' at this location which is not a car park



1) The amount demanded is a penalty and not a Genuine Pre-estimate of loss.
The parking charge does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Parking charges cannot include business costs which would occur whether or not the alleged contravention took place. The amount claimed is excessive and is being enforced as a penalty for allegedly stopping. As VCS are alleging a 'failure to comply' yet cannot show this is a genuine pre-estimate of loss, they have breached the BPA Code of Practice, which renders this charge unenforceable.


2) Not Relevant Land as defined under POFA 2012; no registered keeper liability.
The driver has not been identified, yet VCS are claiming POFA 2012 registered keeper liability for this charge. The registered keeper is not liable for this charge as Liverpool Airport is designated as an airport by the Secretary of State and therefore roads within the airport are subject to airport bylaws and so POFA 2012 does not apply. I put the Operator to strict proof otherwise if they disagree with this point and would require them to show evidence including documentary proof from the Airport Authority that this land is not already covered by bylaws.


3) No landowner contract nor legal standing to form contracts or charge drivers
As VCS are not the owners of this land and as such they cannot form a contract with the driver, I wish VCS to provide me with a full un-redacted copy of their contract with the landowner which allows them to form such a contract. A witness statement as to the existence of such a contract is not sufficient. I believe there is no contract with the landowner that gives VCS the legal standing to neither levy these charges nor pursue them in the courts in their own name as creditor. This was shown to be the case by District Judge McIlwaine in VCS v Ibbotson, Case No 1SE09849 16.5.2012 (transcript in the public domain). So as regards the strict requirements regarding the scope and wording of landowner contracts, VCS have breached the BPA Code of Practice section 7 and failed to demonstrate their legal standing, which renders this charge unenforceable.


4) No contract with driver.
If a contract is to be formed, upon entering the site a driver must be able to read, understand and agree to the terms and conditions (see 'misleading and unclear signage' below). A driver could not stop in order to read the signs as they enter the road as they by doing so they would block the junction. In any case, as VCS are only an agent working for the owner, mere signs do not help them to form a contract. VCS -v-HMRC 2012 is the binding decision in the Upper Chamber which covers this issue with compelling statements of fact about this sort of business model. In this instance, there was no contract formed whatsoever, no consideration was capable of being offered.to the driver, who was simply queuing on a road in traffic and saw no pertinent signs nor accepted these terms whilst driving.


5) Misleading and unclear signage.
The alleged contravention is 'stopping on a clearway' which is a misleading term because of its similarity to the Highways Agency term 'urban clearway'. If VCS intend this apparently private road to be treated by drivers as an urban clearway then the signs and terms used must be compliant with the TRSGD2002 or they will be misleading and confusing to drivers. The signs at this location do not comply with road traffic regulations or their permitted variations and as such are misleading. Any repeater signs in this area do not face the oncoming traffic and are sporadically placed if at all at this junction. So they are unable to be seen by a driver and certainly cannot be read without stopping, and therefore do not comply with the BPA code of practice. VCS are required to show evidence to the contrary.

I would draw the assessor's attention to the 'No Stopping Zones' section of the Chief Adjudicator's first Annual POPLA Report 2013:

''It is therefore very important that any prohibition is clearly marked; bearing in mind that such signage has to be positioned, and be of such a size, as to be read by a motorist without having to stop to look at it. Signs on red routes, unlike those indicating most parking restrictions, are generally positioned to face oncoming traffic, rather than parallel to it.''


6) Non-compliant ANPR 'hidden camera van' system at this location which is not a car park
The BPA code of practice contains the following:
''21 Automatic number plate recognition (ANPR)
21.1 You may use ANPR camera technology to manage, control and enforce parking in private car parks, as long as you do this in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner. Your signs at the car park must tell drivers that you are using this technology and what you will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for.
21.2 Quality checks: before you issue a parking charge notice you must carry out a manual quality check of the ANPR images to reduce errors and make sure that it is appropriate to take action. Full details of the items you should check are listed in the Operators’ Handbook.
21.3 You must keep any ANPR equipment you use in your car parks in good working order. You need to make sure the data you are collecting is accurate, securely held and cannot be tampered with. The processes that you use to manage your ANPR system may be audited by our compliance team or our agents.
21.4 It is also a condition of the Code that, if you receive and process vehicle or registered keeper data, you must:
• be registered with the Information Commissioner
• keep to the Data Protection Act
• follow the DVLA requirements concerning the data
• follow the guidelines from the Information Commissioner’s Office on the use of CCTV and ANPR cameras, and on keeping and sharing personal data such as vehicle registration marks.''

At this location, the secret camera van does not operate in a reasonable, consistent and transparent manner and I contend that VCS have failed to meet the requirements of all of the above points in the BPA Code of Practice. They will need to show evidence to the contrary on every point, and explain how this hidden camera van can be compliant when this is not a car park, it is a road, and there is no opportunity for drivers in moving traffic to be informed that this technology is in use and what VCS will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for. VCS have breached the BPA Code of Practice as regards the use of a non-compliant ANPR system being merely a van fitted with a hidden camera, patrolling land which is not a 'car park' and neither 'managing, enforcing nor controlling parking'.
*******************

Olivier

I'm planning to print this, staple it to the POPLA form, indicate my name / popla code and car reg are on each page, and tick all boxes apart from stolen.

Should I sent this registered?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

No

Just do it online @ the popla web site

Olivier

Thanks. Was afraid my text would be too long but there is no error when I copy it in the box.

Is the text OK then?

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

yes go for it

Olivier

Thanks, I've just submitted it.
Thank you to all those that have helped so far, in this topic or others I got the text from.

When should I expect to hear from Popla?

Umkomaas

Olivier wrote: »

Thanks, I've just submitted it.
Thank you to all those that have helped so far, in this topic or others I got the text from.

When should I expect to hear from Popla?

You should get a confirmation of receipt of your appeal and an approximate date for the adjudication. It has been a 2-month forecast, with many running over that - the backlog was substantial, but they've taken in more Assessors and are turning things around much quicker.

I would imagine you're still looking at about a month - but see what the receipt says. I would think they are getting much closer to delivery by the forecasted date nowadays.

Redx

once they have acknowledged your appeal, I think it may take even longer due to the xmas shutdown , so I dont think it will be until jan or possibly feb 2014 for the actual appeal hearing date

Olivier

Hello,

I have received by email the evidence for the case. There are 2 emails, one with documents, one with a video.

Interestingly there is a copy of an agreement dated 25 July 2013 between Liverpool Airport and VCS.

There is also a copy of Pre-estimate of loss.

The email states that I have up to 7 days before the case is seen to send additional evidence. Is there anything more I can do now?

Thanks