Operator Response to Punitive Charge Appeal

mrankey

So I got a PCN through the mail for an alleged 20 min of overstay in a retail car park. I responded via direct appeal as suggested in the Newbies thread without making any disclosures of the driver.

The main two points I made in the appeal were unclear signage and punitive charge (£90). The operator rejected the appeal and I am slightly concerned by some of the things they have said in their response. Please read their argument below and advise me if you think I should just bite the bullet and pay or continue with the militant approach. If the latter, and you know of any cases where POPLA have accepted the appeal despite the operator submitting the same argument, please let me know. Thanks

1. In response to the punitive charge they said:

"We consider the amount on the PCN as a reasonable charge for liquidated damages. We have calculated this sum as a genuine pre-estimate of our losses as we incur significant costs in managing the parking location to ensure compliance to the stated terms and conditions. The parking charge is based on the following costs; Wages, IT Systems,DVLA Fees, Sending PCNS, Legal, Human Resources, Premises Costs, Loss of purchase revenue to retail outlets withing the car park "

"This sum and the calculations which have been made in setting it, has been approved and agreed by the landowner and/or the agent of the site".

They also say:

"In October 2012, The BPA reduced the maximum recommended charge that a motorist should be expected to pay for a breach of the parking contract or for an act of trespass from £150 to £100"

2. For the unclear signage argument I attached photos which showed large parts of the car park with no signs as well as a photo that showed that the shop signs at the entrance where much larger than the insignificant private land sign which could be missed when turning into the car park. In response to this they said:

"On entry to private land it is the responsibility of the driver to check for signage and ensure the vehicle has been correctly parked"

"The motorist has accepted all of the prevailing terms and conditions of the parking contract including charges for breach of the contract. There are a large number of signs at the site and by remaining at the site the motorist has agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions" They then provided several photographs of small signs dotted around the car park.

I believe the charges are completely unfair and prepared to fight them but I am slightly worried that if I appeal to POPLA I will lose their offer of a discounted settlement. Please advise me on the best thing to do because right now I am starting to sway towards just paying it to be done with this nonsense.

Thanks in advance.

Redx

this tells you what to do https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822

this tells you all about successful appeals and "outs" their lies in your opening post https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4488337

just read back on page after page of successful wins , especially on not a gpeol where these idiots have added running costs into the losses column

did they give you a popla code ?

who is the ppc ?

read this for a start to finish excerpt of a win (highview) https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4877508

and another one (vcs) https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4787270

one of mine (excel) http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64153357&postcount=690

and PE http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=64156492&postcount=692

Stroma

It's complete rubbish, their losses cannot include things that are tax deductible, and things that are a cost of running their business. Popla agree with this, district judges are beginning too as well. Did they give a popla code ? Is it parking eye ?

mrankey

Thanks for your responses, I was just a bit concerned that they might be upping their game. So in terms of estimating losses, do they actually have to quantify the loss as opposed to just reaming off random costs of running a business?

The one which was quite amusing to read at first and then slightly worrying was the "loss of business to retail park outlets" I know this is not a direct loss to them but surely they could quantify this, particularly if they have some agreement with the outlet?!

Is it wise to disclose names of the PPC on here for active cases? I read advice somewhere not to mention anything too case specific as they might be scouring the threads? I do have a POPLA code though.

Stroma

Yes name the parking company as it helps us, but bear in mind my signature below vvv , and if you put them to strict proof of their genuine pre-estimate of loss at popla, then they must provide it or lose. Generally they cannot prove their losses, so they lose every time it's raised

mrankey

Ok thanks, the PPC is Euro Car Parks, do you have any specific info on them? Or are these companies generally all the same?

Redx

more or less the same but the NEWBIES thread you didnt read does mention a few exceptions lol

as for ECP, have a look at this recent popla appeal and rewording, https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4850228
take note of the rewording comments , then draft up your own in notepad and redact any personal info before posting it here for checking

Stroma

Euro are a joke, they are utterly useless and you don't need to worry about them. Send a popla appeal based on what has been linked and you will win 100%