CPM parking fine

kennethwilliams101

Just wantd to make sure.

Although looks like the previous plans have been scuppered. Have actually located a POPLA code and appeals form with the second letter from CPM - 4th, 5th & 6th number are 2,9 & 0.

Sorry for the previous mis-information.

Guys_Dad

Then a pretty standard POPLA appeal majoring on GPEOL and no contract, plus your own points about having a valid pass that may have slipped but was still in view should see them off.

Post up your draft appeal for the once-over and job done.

kennethwilliams101

Apologies for my ignorance - But what do you mean by 'majoring on GPEOL and no contract' ?

Thanks for your help

bod1467

Question - do you know what GPEOL means? Have you tried searching this forum for GPEOL?

Coupon-mad

kennethwilliams101 wrote: »

Apologies for my ignorance - But what do you mean by 'majoring on GPEOL and no contract' ?

Thanks for your help

Have a look at the most recent posts in the POPLA decisions sticky thread and you wil soon know that forum acronym!!

Then look at example POPLA appeals on any current threads.

kennethwilliams101

Here is a first draft of my proposed letter to POPLA - Any thoughts/suggestions would be great - Thanks in advance :

CPM PCN Reference *********
POPLA Reference *********
Vehicle Registration *********

Dear Sir/Madam,

As the registered keeper of the above vehicle I am writing to appeal against a parking charge notice issued in ***** ****** on **********. My initial appeal to UK Car Park Management has been declined.

The vehicle was parked for a short period whilst my family visited relatives who live in the road (a residential street). A valid parking permit to park in this location was given to us by these relatives (who will confirm in writing if required). This permit was placed on the dashboard next to our daughter’s disabled parking badge. However, it would appear that this permit must have fallen from the dashboard whilst the rear passenger door was open. Her disability means that it takes a considerably longer period to exit from the car than would normally be expected.

The first time that we were even made aware of any PCN was when I received the Notice To Keeper letter on ******. This letter stated that ‘This PCN has not been paid in full and the opportunity to pay a discounted amount has been lost’. No ticket was found on the vehicle on the date in question and no other letters regarding a PCN have been received. This seems to be highly suspicious behaviour from CPM.

Furthermore, I do not believe that the charge of £100 is a genuine pre-estimate of loss. I feel it is punitive, unreasonable and totally exceeds an appropriate amount and has no relationship to any loss that would have been suffered by the landowner. The BPA Code of Practice states :

“19.5 If the parking charge that the driver is being asked to pay is for a breach of contract or act of trespass, this charge must be based on the genuine pre-estimate of loss that you suffer.
19.6 If your parking charge is based upon a contractually agreed sum, that charge cannot be punitive or unreasonable.”

I require CPM to provide a detailed breakdown of how the amount of the “charge” was calculated. I am aware from Court rulings and previous POPLA adjudications that the cost of running the business may not be included in these pre-estimate of loss. I would therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

I was also considering a few extra paragraphs along the following lines that are also relatable to my case but not sure of there validity :

2. No authority to levy charges
A parking management company will need to have the proper legal authorization to contract with the consumer on the landowner’s behalf and enforce for breach of contract.
G24 Ltd must produce evidence to demonstrate that it is the landowner, or a contract that it has the authority of the landowner to issue charge notices at this location.
I believe there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles G24 Ltd to levy these charges and to pursue these charges in their own name as creditor in the Courts and therefore has no authority to issue charge notices.
I put the G24 Ltd to strict proof to POPLA that they have the necessary legal authorization at this location and I demand that the G24 Ltd produce to POPLA the contemporaneous and unredacted contract between the landowner and the G24 Ltd. Even if a basic contract is produced and mentions PCNs, the lack of ownership or assignment of title or interest in the land reduces any contract to one that exists simply on an agency basis between G24 Ltd and the owner/occupier, containing nothing that G24 Ltd can lawfully use in their own name as a mere agent, that could impact on a third party customer.
I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

3. Signage
The sign at the entrance to the car park is positioned on a pole on the passenger side of a standard right-hand drive vehicle. This makes the sign difficult for a driver to see from inside the car, regardless of which side of the road the entrance of the car park is approached from. It is also difficult to view this sign without impeding the flow of traffic and pedestrians behind. I enclose photos that demonstrate the entrance signage. The BPA Code of Practice at Appendix B sets out strict requirements for entrance signage, including ''The sign should be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing to look away from the road ahead''
I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.


Yours Faithfully

Coupon-mad

Yep you can add all of those points and just change 'G24' to 'CPM' of course!

And add another one, that for CPM to have ticketed this car, contravenes the BPA Code of Practice where it clearly states that parking companies cannot put tickets on vehicles which are displaying a Blue Badge.

And have a little look at the examples linked in this thread about POPLA appeal wording:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4794963

HTH, nearly done!

kennethwilliams101

Thanks for the info - I've just had a quick look at the BPA Code Of Practice in relation to disability :

16 Disabled motorists

16.1 The Equality Act 2010 says that providers of services to
the public must make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to remove
barriers which may discriminate against disabled people.
16.2 ‘Reasonable adjustments’ to prevent discrimination are
likely to include larger ‘disabled’ parking spaces near to the
entrance or amenities for disabled people whose mobility
is impaired. It also could include lowered payment

machines and other ways to pay if payment is required:

for example, paying by phone. You and your staff also
need to realise that some disabled people may take a
long time to get to the payment machine.
16.3 Operators of off-street car parks do not have to
recognise the Blue Badge scheme. But many choose to
do so to meet their obligations under the Equality Act.
Although a Blue Badge is not issued to all disabled people
it is issued to those with mobility problems. So it is a
good way for parking operators to identify people who
need special parking provision.
16.4 You are at risk of a claim under the Equality Act if you do
not discourage abuse of the ‘disabled’ spaces. This means
that you need to make sure the spaces are regularly
checked to be sure they are not being used by people
who do not have a disability.
16.5 If your landowner provides a concession that allows
parking for disabled people, if a vehicle displays a valid

Blue Badge you must not issue it with a parking charge.

Not sure if my situation qualifies ? What do you think ?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

This bit does apply, if the car park had any disabled bays:

16.5 If your landowner provides a concession that allows
parking for disabled people, if a vehicle displays a valid Blue Badge you must not issue it with a parking charge.

bod1467

Is the BB on "display" if it is in the footwell?

/devil's advocate