UKPC - Parking fine

Peter1979

I have taken the initial appeal letter from the newbie thread and modified it to include this paragraph at the end of the letter;

If you are to persist with this frivolous claim against a myself, the owner of the leasehold of the parking space, I will require the POPLA codes relating to the PCN’s. I should not have to remind you that the 28 days to appeal starts from the date that I receive these codes, NOT as you have stated in your letter that the 28 days start from the date of receiving the letter rejecting my initial appeal.

Does this seem more suitable?

Redx

actually the date is embedded in the popla verification code and is valid until 28 days later

I am not convinced that you need to be arguing about this , because if the PPC does what they should do they will generate the codes and send you the letter with them enclosed , then you check the codes with the parking cowboys checker to check when they expire , making sure your popla appeals are with popla before the expiry

the main point here is to appeal , and they either cancel or they give you valid codes

Peter1979

I appealed online through their site before I discovered the information here. They have rejected the appeal even though I submitted evidence of my parking permit. The letter isn't a direct fit to my situation as arguably upon rejecting my online appeal they should have provided the codes with that letter.

What I have read is that a POPLA code is generated once the appeal is rejected, hence I am unsure whether this would have been generated on 11th March or when they actually provide me with a code. A little confused with the situation.

bod1467

They didn't supply you with a code. Write back to them and say GIVE ME MY POPLA CODE YOU TW@TS!

Redx

not all companies issue the code straightaway on the rejection, clearly they should but dont always do so

either you got a popla verification code with your rejection , or you didnt

if you did you will find it somewhere on your paperwork and it should have a similar start date embedded into the code as the rejection letter

if they didnt issue the code , they broke the BPA CoP and should be reported to the BPA for it as a code breach (each and every time they failed)

so your letter of appeal above was fine except the part I highlighted didnt make sense as its not relevant if no code was issued

so if no code was issued , adapt your letter you posted earlier but dont include nonsense or untruths , stick to the fact that no popla code was or were issued and should have been for each and every pcn

then when you get the code , check its valid and its expiry , all explained in the newbies thread , and the code is valid for 28 days from the day its generated

Coupon-mad

Are you certain there is no POPLA form attached or printed on the back of the letter? Your description of their reply suggests you have your POPLA form.

Peter1979

Ok, located POPLA code, doing stuff from work so no access to letters as they were at home. My letter to popla has been taken and adapted from the ukpc one in the newbie thread, although that one was for blue badge so had a lot more information to trim

Dear POPLA adjudicator,

POPLA appeal re UKPC charge (POPLA code and )

I am writing to you as the driver of this car (already admitted) who is not liable for the parking charge for several reasons, the primary reason being that I was parked in a private car park, on private land of which bay 73 is part of the leasehold of the property I own. The vehicle was not improperly parked and the parking 'charge' notice was nothing but a penalty and exceeded the appropriate amount.

POINTS OF APPEAL AGAINST THIS CHARGE

CONTRACT WITH LANDOWNER - NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE BPA CODE OF PRACTICE AND NO STATUS TO OFFER PARKING OR ENFORCE TICKETS
UKPC do not own this car park and are acting merely as agents for the management company. UKPC has not provided me with any evidence that it is lawfully entitled to offer parking spaces, allege breach of contract or enforce parking charges (as evidenced in the Higher Court findings in VCS v HMRC 2012). UKPC has no proprietary interest or assignment of title of the land in question.

I require UKPC to provide a full copy of the contemporaneous, signed & dated contract with the landowner (not just a signed slip of paper from someone at the management company) because even if one exists, I say it does not specifically enable UKPC to pursue parking charges in the courts. This would not be compliant with the requirements set out in the BPA Code of Practice.

NO BREACH OF CONTRACT AND NO GENUINE PRE-ESTIMATE OF LOSS
UKPC are clearly attempting to enforce this charge under paragraph B 19.5 of the BPA Code of Practice and must be required to validate this argument by providing POPLA with a detailed financial appraisal which evidences the genuine pre-estimated amount of loss or damages in this particular car park for this particular 'contravention'.

UKPC have not shown a breakdown of their alleged 'loss' - which cannot include their operational day-to-day running costs. No claim for loss for a 'breach of terms' can possibly apply to the owner of the leasehold of the parking space needing and using a 'reasonable adjustment' provision.




UNLAWFUL PENALTY CHARGE
Since there was no demonstrable loss/damage and yet a breach of contract has been alleged, this 'charge' can only be an unlawful attempt at dressing up a penalty to impersonate a parking ticket.
The BPA Ltd (seeking advice on behalf of all AOS members, including UKPC) was warned about such charges being unenforceable by the Office of Fair Trading in 2013. The information that the Office of Fair Trading gave to the BPA Ltd on parking charges expressed the view that a parking charge will not automatically be recoverable, simply because it is stated to be a parking charge. It cannot be used to create a loss where none exists. It will not be recoverable if the court finds that it is being imposed as a penalty. If a parking charge is imposed for {breach} under a contract, in order for it to be recoverable as liquidated damages, the court will need to be satisfied of a number of matters, including that it represents a genuine pre-estimate of the loss incurred and that it meets the requirements of applicable consumer protection legislation, for example the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. The OFT also expressed the view that the court will also need to be satisfied about who the consumer was contracting with and that this is the party bringing proceedings.

This transparently punitive charge by UKPC is therefore unenforceable.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
I ask that this appeal be allowed and respectfully request POPLA consider that as I correctly parked in my own parking space, that I own, and provided evidence of a valid permit in addition to UKPC showing no evidence of a contract between themselves and the management company acting for the freeholder, have shown no breakdown of the ‘costs’ they believe relate to a genuine pre-estimate of loss (there is none, it is my parking space to park in as I wish) that there are no grounds for this PCN to be upheld.
POPLA must surely now order the Operator to cancel this fake PCN.

Coupon-mad

I would always have a signage paragraph, purely to make them jump through the hoops of producing the right map & sign pics for the right car park (has tripped a PPC up before).

bod1467

Please edit your post above to redact the POPLA codes.

Peter1979

Apologies, slight oversight and now amended.

Will pop the letter off today, hopefully that will do it.