Private PCN - No reply to my appeal after 3 months, then...

brutal_deluxe

Thanks. Just a quick one - I was supplied with two photographs by the PCC - one of the rear of my vehicle with numberplate, one of the dashboard of a vehicle (with absence of ticket) which is the same model as mine, but not necessarily mine. Could this be something to include? Its a popular model!

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

No, basically anything that happened on the day is irrelevant for Popla, even if a plague of locusts appeared or you ended up being flooded in !, it doesnt matter to Popla what so ever. Thats known as mitigation.

It all needs to be based on Legal matters, GPEOL , no contract etc

brutal_deluxe

No not mitigating. Just that there's no evidence that the ticket wasn't on MY dash. No good?

Coupon-mad

Nope because that's playing games, semantics which will not win. No GPEOL and no contract/standing will win, as per the examples in the How to win at POPLA link. If you don't know what the acronyms mean...read the NEWBIES thread section on acronyms!

This is simple now you have examples to adapt. You are NOT writing about any permit at all.

brutal_deluxe

Ok point taken re photos. Well anyway without much further ado, here's a very rough draft popla with what I intend to include. The photo thing is in there anyway but will remove in final copy unless further reason to use it comes to light. Feel free to refer to item numbers when suggesting changes/deletions etc. Thanks!

I wish to appeal against the PCN notice on the following grounds:

1/ Firstly, It has not been made clear which of the (Company Name/Establishment) car parks the notice is referring to, as there are two (Establishments) in the same city.

2/ Authority to issue tickets
I dispute that the PCC has a right to issue tickets on the land in question. Please could I be provided with a copy of the contract between the PCC and the landowner/landholder that provides the necessary contractual written authority for the issue and enforcement of the Parking Charge Notice.

3/ Creditor status
Your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper simply mentions [Insert name of parking company if that is who is named on the PCN/NTK]. Please tell me who is the actual creditor making this £[insert amount] parking charge demand. I need to know exactly who is making the claim and in what capacity.

4/ Signage poorly positioned
The entrance sign is positioned so the driver cannot safely stop and read the Ts&Cs and therefore does not comply with BPA regulations. Furthermore, it would also be unsafe for a pedestrian to do the same. (Photographs and diagram available). The appeal rejection letter also claims that the T&Cs are clearly displayed on the signage on site. I would like the PCC to supply photographs that show the signage is displayed in a clear, legible and understandable manner. Please could the PCC also supply diagrams of signage locations on their site.

5/ No contract
With relation to the signage, it therefore leaves insufficient opportunity for the driver to review contractual information before deciding to enter the car park. And even if there was a contract, which has yet to be proven, then it is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

6/ Cameras
a) I require the PCC to present evidence on whether the camera was checked and maintained recently in relation to the date of the alleged incident, to ensure the accuracy of the images presented in the NTK.

b) The images presented to me in the NTK shows the dashboard of a vehicle which is alleged to belong to the keeper but does not contain sufficient evidence that this is fact. It may be the image of another similar vehicle dashboard and therefore I cannot rely on this as evidence that I did not display a ticket and therefore breached the T&Cs.

7/ The charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, or is punitive or unreasonable
I believe the £80 charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss or is punitive or unreasonable in proportion to the alleged parking contravention, and is therefore not enforceable. If the latter, to charge £80 for the alleged 14 minute overstay is grossly disproportionate to the £1/hr fee.

The appellant requires (PCC) 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-estimates of loss.

8/ Failure to reply to initial appeal
Failure to adhere to BPA CoP (22.8) - PCC denies receipt of email as justification to charge full amount, even though I supplied evidence of my initial appeal email which shows the official timestamp and that the email address was correct. I used the same email address for further correspondence and it was successfully received. I cannot be held liable as I correctly followed instructions on the reverse of the PCN and supply reasonable evidence of this.

Stroma

Can you take out all the abreviations they mean nothing beyond the forums , PPCs should be replaced with company name NtK and CoP should be used in full instead of that. Mitigation should not be used, just stick to not genuine pre estimate of loss, the contract, authority and signage

brutal_deluxe

Ok got you. So you think points about signage is generally strong? I also read to include as many points as possible so to make it more difficult for the ppc? I'm particularly annoyed about the email thing, I feel I have a particularly strong case with that. I have plenty of proof it was successfully sent and therefore is the ppc problem?

Coupon-mad

So you think points about signage is generally strong?

Signage is only strong if argued that it could not have formed a contract (e.g. if unclear/unlit and it was dark) but is always worth bunging in to make the PPC have to prove signs with maps and photos. Yes, make their life difficult.

Not sure why you have set your POPLA appeal nothing like the examples. 'No GPEOL' should be no 1 and 'no standing' landowner contract no 2.

Also is this meant for POPLA? It isn't written that way as you have asked questions and said 'your' PCN, and too many 'please can I'!

Why not just adapt an example, you could have done it by now.

4consumerrights

Your appeal needs a lot of work still - sorry but true.

Try and read some other threads with POPLA appeals which were successful.

Post up again.

Regarding your statement about the photograph - if it is unclear as to whether a ticket is displayed/or the car in question - this can be added to the appeal. Sometimes evidence or lack of can be turned against PPCs but in your case this was a pay and display so would totally negate any statement that no contract was made due to inadequate signage.

You are also referring to I all the way through - this is an appeal from the RK not driver!

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Ive removed all the bits that are not needed, what ive left below after some editing and shifting around of order (pre estimate of loss) will win at Popla

brutal_deluxe wrote: »

Ok point taken re photos. Well anyway without much further ado, here's a very rough draft popla with what I intend to include. The photo thing is in there anyway but will remove in final copy unless further reason to use it comes to light. Feel free to refer to item numbers when suggesting changes/deletions etc. Thanks!

I wish to appeal against the PCN notice on the following grounds:

1/ Firstly, It has not been made clear which of the (Company Name/Establishment) car parks the notice is referring to, as there are two (Establishments) in the same city.

2/ Authority to issue tickets
I dispute that the PCC has a right to issue tickets on the land in question. Please could I be provided with a copy of the contract between the PCC and the landowner/landholder that provides the necessary contractual written authority for the issue and enforcement of the Parking Charge Notice.

3/ Creditor status
Your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper simply mentions [Insert name of parking company if that is who is named on the PCN/NTK]. Please tell me who is the actual creditor making this £[insert amount] parking charge demand. I need to know exactly who is making the claim and in what capacity.

5/ No contract
With relation to the signage, it therefore leaves insufficient opportunity for the driver to review contractual information before deciding to enter the car park. And even if there was a contract, which has yet to be proven, then it is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

7/ The charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, or is punitive or unreasonable
I believe the £80 charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss or is punitive or unreasonable in proportion to the alleged parking contravention, and is therefore not enforceable. If the latter, to charge £80 for the alleged 14 minute overstay is grossly disproportionate to the £1/hr fee.

The appellant requires (PCC) 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-estimates of loss.

s.