Euro Car Parks, overstay...

SpaaceMumps

Hi - As the registered keeper, I have a received through the post an ANPR PCN for £90 from Euro Car Parks (Hargreaves Management Ltd) for staying over 2 hours at Solent Retail Park, England. It was received within 14 days of the parking 'issue'.

Having read both the "Newbies" stuff and the "Umkomaas' 'walk through'", I am confused as to whether:-

1. I start with a so call 'soft' the 'driver' was shopping here letter with 'driver' / 'passenger' shopping receipts. I cannot see a template for this.
   
   or
   
2. go straight in with the "THE FIRST APPEAL TO THE PPC " and include the shopping receipts. This doesn't seen to be a 'soft' letter to me.

I also worry that by the keeper providing any receipts, they have implied that they know who the driver is. I am hoping that the keeper is under no obligation to provide this information whether they know the driver or not?

I plan provide a copy of receipts with identifying names and numbers withheld.

I shall also complain separately to all the retailers the 'driver' used at the site and to the land owners. It is ridiculous to have such a short limit in a clothes place (clothes shopping is a slow process for some). Not to mention Hobbycraft. Furthermore, I have never seen the Euro Car Parks warning signs but having seen the photos the 'driver' took, they are mounted above head high throughout the car park. And there is no signage to be seen upon entry to the car park. I can only marvel that I've not received a PCN, as I'm sure to have been there over 2 hours in the past.

Thank you to all who have posted this valuable information for us to use.

da_rule

Appeal as the registered keeper and include the receipts. Even if you do know who the driver is you cannot be forced to identify them. If you want to 'protect' them by assuming registered keeper liability rather than passing on the liability to the driver then that is your prerogative.

Use the template appeal in the first post of the newbies sticky thread but add a further point to cover the fact that the driver was a customer.

SpaaceMumps

da_rule wrote: »

Use the template appeal in the first post of the newbies sticky thread but add a further point to cover the fact that the driver was a customer.

Thank you for reading my post.
So to be clear, you mean the litigious template under heading "THE FIRST APPEAL TO THE PPC " . I do not call this a 'soft' approach and don't want to upset them straight away. I was confused as this template does not request a POPLA number if the appeal is rejected.

Thank you.
MM

bod1467

PPCs don't care about YOUR feelings - why should you care about theirs? All they want is your money.

That appeal template is specifically written to get the charge cancelled or a POPLA code. The reason it doesn't say POPLA is because there is the BPA/POPLA but there is also the IPC/IAS.

SpaaceMumps

bod1467 wrote: »

PPCs don't care about YOUR feelings - why should you care about theirs?

lol

Well, I know but I can't help trying the 'catch more flys with honey than vinegar' approach.

Anyway 'soft' yet litigious letter will be in the post with 'proof of posting'.

Now I must swot up on all those POPLA threads!

Cheers

MM

Guys_Dad

I would go with a soft, non-litigious letter. The aim is to get the ticket cancelled pre-POPLA and I agree with your initial sentiments.

Not sure how many have folded with the litigious 1st appeal and there are sufficient successes with a polite but firm appeal based on genuine spends (usually over £30).

SpaaceMumps

Guys_Dad wrote: »

I would go with a soft, non-litigious letter. The aim is to get the ticket cancelled pre-POPLA and I agree with your initial sentiments.

Not sure how many have folded with the litigious 1st appeal and there are sufficient successes with a polite but firm appeal based on genuine spends (usually over £30).

The idea on this forum of a 'soft' letter is the litigious one. I think. I guess 'soft' is for our benefit, in that it gets cancelled at the first hurdle...