Euro Car Parks PCN - help please

Nile

PM sent, thanks Coupon-mad.


Thanks also to Redx for highlighting the relevant threads I need.

Nile

A big THANK YOU to Coupon-mad:A for confirming my suspicions regarding the Euro Car Parks letter I received...........it is at best misleading and some could say 'deceitful'.:mad:


I will reveal the detail later.;)

Redx

good, looks like we may all learn something new then , lol

Nile

Would you please check the wording and layout of my POPLA appeal and advise any additions or amendments I need to make before I send it. Have I missed anything vital?



Also, do I need to mention that I appealed to Euro Car Parks (which was rejected) in this POPLA appeal or is it obvious because I have been given a POPLA code?



Should I enclose a copy (or the original) of the Euro Car Parks PCN and the Euro Car Parks rejection letter via snail mail in the post? If not, I could submit a POPLA appeal online and speed up the process.


POPLA code xxxxxxxxxx

Euro Car Parks – Parking Charge Notice Number xxxxxxxxxxx

Vehicle Registration XXXX XXX


11 January 2014

Dear Sir

On (date) my vehicle was parked in the Morrisons (location) car park which has 3 hours free parking. Euro Car Parks used cameras to capture the image of my vehicle entering and leaving the car park, with an overstay of xx minutes. Euro Car Parks say that it is a Breach of Terms and Conditions because my vehicle was parked longer than the maximum period allowed.

As the registered keeper, I would like to appeal this notice on the following grounds:
1 Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
2 No authority to levy charges
3. Unlawful Penalty Charge
4. ANPR Accuracy

1. Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The demand for a payment of £90 is punitive, unreasonable, exceeds an appropriate amount, and has no relationship to the loss that would have been suffered by the Landowner. The keeper declares that the charge is punitive and therefore an unenforceable penalty.
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 therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

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.
Euro Car Parks 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 Euro Car Parks 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 Euro Car Parks Ltd to strict proof to POPLA that they have the necessary legal authorization at this location and I demand that Euro Car Parks Ltd produce to POPLA the contemporaneous and unredacted contract between the landowner and Euro Car Parks 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 Euro Car Parks Ltd and the owner/occupier, containing nothing that Euro Car Parks 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. Unlawful Penalty Charge
Since there was no demonstrable loss/damage and yet a breach of contract has been alleged for a free car park, it can only remain a fact that this 'charge' is an attempt at extorting an unlawful charge to impersonate a parking ticket. This is similar to the decisions in several County Court cases such as Excel Parking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman (2008), also OBServices v Thurlow (review, February 2011), Parking Eye v Smith (Manchester County Court December 2011) and UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012).
The operator could state the letter as an invoice or request for monies, but chooses to use the wording “CHARGE NOTICE” in an attempt to be deemed an official parking fine similar to what the Police and Council Wardens issue.
I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

4. ANPR Accuracy
Euro Car Parks Ltd are obliged to make sure the APNR equipment is in working order, as described in paragraph 21.3 of the British Parking Association's Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, version 3 of June 2013. I require Euro Car Parks Ltd to present records as to the dates and times of when the cameras were checked, calibrated and generally maintained to ensure the accuracy of the dates and times of any ANPR images. This is important because the entirety of the charge is founded on two images purporting to show my vehicle entering and exiting at specific times. It is therefore critical that Euro Car Parks produces evidence in response to these points.

For the reasons stated above I therefore respectfully request that this appeal be allowed.

Yours faithfully

Nile

A bump to page 1.:o

Nile

Apologies for creating a new thread but when I bumped my original thread.............I didn't get a response.


Would you please have a look at my POPLA Appeal and give me feedback. Do I need to make any changes to the layout, any additions or amendments etc? Have I missed anything vital?


Should I enclose a copy (or the original) of the Euro Car Parks PCN and the Euro Car Parks rejection letter via snail mail in the post? If not, I could submit a POPLA appeal online and speed up the process.


POPLA code xxxxxxxxxx

Euro Car Parks – Parking Charge Notice Number xxxxxxxxxxx

Vehicle Registration XXXX XXX


11 January 2014

Dear Sir

On (date) my vehicle was parked in the Morrisons (location) car park which has 3 hours free parking. Euro Car Parks used cameras to capture the image of my vehicle entering and leaving the car park, with an overstay of xx minutes. Euro Car Parks say that it is a Breach of Terms and Conditions because my vehicle was parked longer than the maximum period allowed.

As the registered keeper, I would like to appeal this notice on the following grounds:
1 Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
2 No authority to levy charges
3. Unlawful Penalty Charge
4. ANPR Accuracy

1. Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The demand for a payment of £90 is punitive, unreasonable, exceeds an appropriate amount, and has no relationship to the loss that would have been suffered by the Landowner. The keeper declares that the charge is punitive and therefore an unenforceable penalty.
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 therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

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.
Euro Car Parks 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 Euro Car Parks 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 Euro Car Parks Ltd to strict proof to POPLA that they have the necessary legal authorization at this location and I demand that Euro Car Parks Ltd produce to POPLA the contemporaneous and unredacted contract between the landowner and Euro Car Parks 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 Euro Car Parks Ltd and the owner/occupier, containing nothing that Euro Car Parks 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. Unlawful Penalty Charge
Since there was no demonstrable loss/damage and yet a breach of contract has been alleged for a free car park, it can only remain a fact that this 'charge' is an attempt at extorting an unlawful charge to impersonate a parking ticket. This is similar to the decisions in several County Court cases such as Excel Parking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman (2008), also OBServices v Thurlow (review, February 2011), Parking Eye v Smith (Manchester County Court December 2011) and UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012).
The operator could state the letter as an invoice or request for monies, but chooses to use the wording “CHARGE NOTICE” in an attempt to be deemed an official parking fine similar to what the Police and Council Wardens issue.
I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

4. ANPR Accuracy
Euro Car Parks Ltd are obliged to make sure the APNR equipment is in working order, as described in paragraph 21.3 of the British Parking Association's Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice, version 3 of June 2013. I require Euro Car Parks Ltd to present records as to the dates and times of when the cameras were checked, calibrated and generally maintained to ensure the accuracy of the dates and times of any ANPR images. This is important because the entirety of the charge is founded on two images purporting to show my vehicle entering and exiting at specific times. It is therefore critical that Euro Car Parks produces evidence in response to these points.

For the reasons stated above I therefore respectfully request that this appeal be allowed.

Yours faithfully






Thanks for reading/comments.


Nile

Coupon-mad

Also, do I need to mention that I appealed to Euro Car Parks (which was rejected) in this POPLA appeal or is it obvious because I have been given a POPLA code?

No need, it is indeed obvious to POPLA.

Should I enclose a copy (or the original) of the Euro Car Parks PCN and the Euro Car Parks rejection letter via snail mail in the post? If not, I could submit a POPLA appeal online and speed up the process.

No need, they have to show POPLA and you all their evidence which will include the letters. A copy will be sent to you before you win! Do submit it online.

And you might want to beef up the ANPR point...I added a suggested version in post #22 of this POPLA guidance thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816165

They have to signpost how they will use the data and there's other stuff too as you will see there.

You could also add to your introduction, the issue you mentioned to me by pm. Ask POPLA to refer the matter to the BPA which may get ECP a slap.

HO87

Hi Nile

Your appeal hits all the right notes - especially that of genuine pre-estimate of loss which should be the clincher.

I would suggest making to following changes:

1. Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
The demand for a payment of £90 is punitive, unreasonable, exceeds an appropriate amount, and has bears no relationship to the loss that would may have been suffered by the Landowner. The keeper declares that the charge is punitive and therefore an unenforceable penalty.
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 therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

Then:

2. No authority to levy charges
A parking management company will need to must have the proper legal authorization to contract with the consumer on the landowner’s behalf and enforce for breach of contract.
Euro Car Parks 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 do not believe there is no a contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles Euro Car Parks Ltd to levy these charges and to pursue these charges in their own name as creditor in the Courts and therefore Euro Car Parks Ltd has no authority to issue charge notices.
I therefore request that POPLA put the Euro Car Parks Ltd to strict proof to POPLA that they have the necessary legal authorization at this location and I demand that Euro Car Parks Ltd produce to POPLA the contemporaneous and unredacted contract between the landowner and Euro Car Parks Ltd. Even if a basic contract is produced and mentions Parking Charge Notices, 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 Euro Car Parks Ltd and the owner/occupier, containing nothing that Euro Car Parks 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.

Then:

3. Unlawful Penalty Charge
Since there was is no demonstrable loss/damage and yet a breach of contract has been alleged for a free car park, it can only remain a fact that this 'charge' is an attempt at extorting an unlawful charge to by impersonateing a parking ticket. This is similar to the decisions of fact made in several County Court cases such as Excel Parking Services v Hetherington-Jakeman (2008), also OBServices v Thurlow (review appeal, February 2011), Parking Eye v Smith (Manchester County Court December 2011) and UKCPS v Murphy (April 2012).
The operator could state set out their letter as an invoice or request for monies, but, it is asserted, chooses to use the wording “CHARGE NOTICE” in an attempt tohat it will be deemed an official parking fine similar to what the Police and Council Wardens issue.
I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.

As for starting a new thread I understand your desire to get things moving but - with respect - it is the weekend and we deal with substantial numbers (here and elsewhere). This thread will need to be amalgamated with your original (PM Crabman).

Nile

As a newbie to this board, I am EXTREMELY relieved to learn what I need to do.


There is a lot to learn and it does look very daunting but, I'm now much better equipped to make my POPLA appeal.


I would like to say a big THANK YOU to everyone who has posted helpful information on this board. I've read most of it over recent days.;)


I'll keep you posted.


Nile

cash_mad

Go, Nile, Go !
Thanks to ALL of you in this 'knicker-gripper'...I am still awaiting my snooty refusal by e c p...