Please help PCN from PCM UK Ltd

Sassii

That's relating to ticket 1. sorry I forgot to add it

Thanks

Coupon-mad

So you mean it crossed in the post? I would just wait for a response re your appeal to NTKs #1 and #2 then.

Sassii

Coupon-mad wrote: »

So you mean it crossed in the post? I would just wait for a response re your appeal to NTKs #1 and #2 then.

As expected they rejected my appeal for both tickets . attached the letters they sent but they didn't send any popla code. Could you please have a look to their letters & advise.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=26110

Thanks very much

Coupon-mad

The letters read as though there should be a POPLA form attached, or 10 digit code hidden somewhere (check the back of the letters).

If absolutely certain there is no POPLA code or form, send an immediate complaint to the BPA using the email addy for Steve Clark as shown in several threads when you search his name.

Sassii

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The letters read as though there should be a POPLA form attached, or 10 digit code hidden somewhere (check the back of the letters).

If absolutely certain there is no POPLA code or form, send an immediate complaint to the BPA using the email addy for Steve Clark as shown in several threads when you search his name.

Thanks I found it. It was written on the top with PCN details. Please advise for next step. I'll write a draft for popla appeal.

Regards

Coupon-mad

Same as treehuggerss' thread - next step is to draft a POPLA appeal from our examples in the Newbies sticky.

Sassii

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Same as treehuggerss' thread - next step is to draft a POPLA appeal from our examples in the Newbies sticky.

Could you please hae a quick look in the below POPLA draft appeal.

Dear POPLA Adjudicator
Vehicle Registration:XXXXXXX
PCN ref: XXXXXXX
Alleged Contravention Date: XXXXXX
Date of notice: XXXXXXX 2013
Appeal re verification code xxxxxxxxxx
I am the registered Keeper of the above vehicle and I am appealing against above charge. I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge on the following grounds and would ask that they are all considered.

1- PCM doesn’t comply with POFA 2012.
2- PCM doesn’t comply with BBA Code. (Photos evidence attached)
3- The amount demanded is not a Genuine Pre-estimate of loss.
4- I require the contract with the landowner is produced, as PCM are not the landowners and I contend they have no legal standing to pursue this charge.
5- As I’m resident of xxxxxxxxx (attached recently utility bill) I can confirm PCM started enforcement without sending resident car permit up to now.

Please find below detailed information about the points raised above.

1- PCM doesn’t comply with POFA 2012.section 7-2 (a), & 8-2(a) & 9-2(a) which stated clearly that ‘’ The notice must specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates’’. And it’s clearly seen from PCN (attached) that there is no period of parking specified in it at all.

2- PCM doesn’t comply with Section 18 (Signs) & Appendix B of BBA Code as :(Photos evidence attached)
a) There are no car park entrance signs at all.
b) Signs in this car park are very hard to read and understand and some signs are 3 meters high.
c) As you enter into the car park area there are signs mounted against the right & left hand side which in order to read requires the driver to look 90 degrees away from the road ahead and that doesn’t comply with BBA Code appendix B which stated that ‘’ The sign should be placed so that it is readable by drivers without their needing to look away from the road ahead).
d) Some signs placed in very dark area which is impossible to read.
e) The capital height of the Group 1 & 2 text size does not comply with appendix B of BPA Code of Practice. From the attached photo (above) evidence I have supplied it clearly should that the Group 1 capital height to be around 25mm.
f) PCM doesn’t allow any grace period at all which it doesn’t comply with BBA Code section 13. (sign photo attached)
g) PCM also ask residents for money to issue permits for visitor car Park which it’s not in BBA code (attached PCM letter).
3- This 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. PCM may try to allege their minimal signage creates a contractual agreement, but this is denied. In any case, PCM's letter clearly states that this parking incident relates to an alleged 'breach of contract' (their words). So the entirety of the parking charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss in order to be possibly enforceable. PCM in this case & up to now didn’t send to me any supporting documents justify £100 as a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The Office of Fair Trading has stated to the BPA Ltd that a 'parking charge' is not automatically recoverable simply because it is stated to be a parking charge, as it cannot be used to state a loss where none exists. Parking charges cannot include tax-deductible business costs for running a parking company, such as site signage and maintenance, staff employment, membership fees, postage, etc. It shouldn’t be recoverable as it is being enforced purely as a penalty. Since there is no other income at this site, these PCNs represent the only profit for PCM and it is clear that they cannot be operating at a permanent loss.

4- I put PCM to strict proof that they have the proper legal authorisation from the landowner to contract with drivers and to enforce charges in their own name as creditor in the courts for breach of contract. To show compliance with the BPA CoP section 7, I require PCM to produce the landowner contract - not just an inadmissible 'witness statement' saying such a contract exists - since they do not own the land. I contend that any business arrangement for parking services (if it exists) is merely an agency matter between the landowner and PCM and cannot impact upon drivers or keepers whose tenancy grants them the overriding legal right to peaceful enjoyment of their property (including parking spaces).
It has also been widely reported that some parking companies have provided photocopied “witness statements” instead of the relevant contract. These highly questionable documents from parking operators have been exposed in the public domain as sometimes having had the date added after 'witness signature' by another person, adding a random date to suit a court or POPLA case. These witness statements are therefore not relevant to a specific event and the details are far too unreliable to confirm compliance of the contract as defined in the BPA CoP and would fail to meet the level of certainty required for a POPLA or court decision. If PCM produce a 'witness statement' I contend that there is no proof whatsoever that the alleged signatory on behalf of the landowner has ever seen the relevant contract, or, indeed is even an employee of the landowner. I require, if such a witness statement is submitted instead of the landowner contract itself, that this is disregarded and that the Chief Adjudicator is required to investigate this issue and consider carefully the serious irregularities known about these documents if the assessor in my case is minded to consider one as evidence.

5- I put PCM to strict proof that they sent resident car permit to me in my flat address.

Finally, a third party agent cannot pursue such a charge anyway, as was found in ParkingEye v Sharma: Case No. 3QT62646 in the Brentford County Court23/10/2013. District Judge Jenkins dismissed the case on the grounds that the parking contract was a commercial matter between Parking Eye and the landowner, and didn’t create any contractual relationship with motorists who used the car park. I submit that this applies in this case as well.

Yours,

bod1467

BPA not BBA.

Paragraph break between section 2.g) and 3)

Have another read through - some of the grammar is off. (e.g. section 2.e) is not clear ... Should - you mean Shows? Is 25 mm compliant or not? If not, what IS compliant? [Spell it out - make it easy for the assessor]).

Sassii

bod1467 wrote: »

BPA not BBA.

Paragraph break between section 2.g) and 3)

Have another read through - some of the grammar is off. (e.g. section 2.e) is not clear ... Should - you mean Shows? Is 25 mm compliant or not? If not, what IS compliant? [Spell it out - make it easy for the assessor]).

Thanks. Spot on

Coupon-mad

I would not send POPLA a Utility Bill as they won't take it into account. It's more about your words about 'contract', so this heading could be:


5- PCM started enforcement without offering/delivering to me a residents' parking permit, so the required elements to create a 'parking contract' with me have not been met.




5 PCM failed to supply me with a resident car parking permit. Omitting to send me a permit before attempting to enforce charges puts PCM in breach of their landowner contract because I contend that PCM undertake to enforce on this site only after permits have been issued. It also means there was/is no contract with any driver of my car or myself, because as a resident - not a trespasser - I can only possibly agree to the 'offer' of a parking scheme and consideration (the parking space) when I accept the terms of such a scheme in advance of the parking event, by the handing over/delivery of a permit that PCM undertook to send me. They failed to do so, therefore was no meeting of minds, no offer, no consideration and no acceptance so the elements of a contract are conspicuous by their absence.



The rest looks good to go, if you tweak it as per bod1467's advice.