Parking Fine Fforest-fach Swansea (Highview)

Cezly

Will do. Thanks again

Cezly

Just one last thing, I am doing the POPLA appeal now and am a little confused , There are two options on their site, 1 is Submit appeal online and 2 is Submit evidence online.

Do I need to do Number 1 option first and then option 2 or can I do option 2 from the off

Thanks again

Redx

just put a covering note saying see attached popla appeal , then attach it and submit it

tick the 3 boxes out of 4 (dont tick the stolen option)

Cezly

Sorry Redx, I must be having a senior moment! Is that through the option 1 or option 2 on the website. Thanks for your patience.............:)

Redx

I have never submitted a popla appeal , so cannot actually say, BUT I was under the impression that you can attach it at the point of submission

lazydaisy made a clear post about this a few months ago

Cezly

ok will check that out, thanks

Redx

here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4919594

Coupon-mad

You can't do option 2 first, the system doesn't recognise the POPLA code unless you've 'submitted an appeal' as step #1 first.

Cezly

Hi all, have received an evidence pack from poppa today with highviews responses . Is this a standard reply, it seems pretty detailed as it has photographic evidence of the signage and a google maps image showing where all of the signage is placed. (seems to be more signs indicated on the map than there are in reality). Here is the main body of the text. Is it just wait now for a decision?

We received correspondence from ******* who appealed her PCN on the basis that the amount requested does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
We consider the amount on the PCN as a reasonable charge for liquidated damages in respect of a breach of the parking contract and contend that it is not a 'penalty' for a number of reasons;

1'. 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 & conditions and to follow up on any breaches of these that are identified. The parking charge in this instance was established after consideration of the following costs which we incur on each ticket issued;

1 - Wages and Salaries including Employers NI Contributions
2 - Contribution to Head Office Overheads
3 - IT systems, software, licences and peripherals
4 - Legal, Accounting and other Professional Advice
5 - Print, Postage and Stationery
6 - Necessary Subscriptions - inc BPA, POPLA and ICO
7 - DVLA Fees / Processing Costs
8 - Repairs and Maintenance of Parking Payment and Enforcement Equipment
9 - Vehicle and Mobile Costs
10 - Erection and Maintenance of Site Signage
11 - Depreciation on Equipment and Vehicles
12 - Sundry Other Related Costs


2. Last october after significant pressure from Government and motoring/consumer organisations, the British Parking Association reduced the maximum recommended charge that a motorist should be expected to pay for a breach ofthe parking contract or for an act oftrespass from f,150 to f100. Despite the BPA being unable, due to robust OFT advice, to fix prices at this level, the actions of the Association were welcomed by all stakeholders. In this instance the charge being levied is within fwellwithin) the recommendations set out within Clause 19 of
the BPA Code of Practice

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

4- Parking Charges are fair and reasonable, and have been tested at the Court of Appeal. A charge of 875 was found by HHf Hegarty QC in the case of ParkingEye v Somerfield Stores (201\) to be a reasonable charge, by which the motorist [when exceeding the specified time limit) would be contractually bound. See also Combined Parking Solutions v Dorringt on (2012) and Combined Parking Solutions v

Blackburn (2007). Further evidence, that parking charges cannot be viewed as penalties, can be found in Mayhook v National Car Parks and Fuller LZ1lZl, Combined Parking Solutions v Mr Stephen fames Thomas [2008] and Combined Parking Solutions v De Brunner 120071

5. We have provided clear evidence that by staying at the location, the motorist has accepted all of the prevailing terms & conditions of the parking contract including the charges for breach of that contract. There are a large number of signs at the parking location, both at the entrance and throughout the site which offers the parking contract to the motorist, and sets out the terms and conditions of the parking area upon which the operator will rely, and upon which, by remaining at the location, the motorist has agreed to be bound by - these terms and conditions clearly show the amount which will become payable if the terms and conditions are breached.

6. We would contend that it is too late now for the appellant to indicate their unhappiness with the parking charge - this should have been done as soon as they saw the signs that stated the parking terms and conditions and charges at the location - if the appellant was not prepared to pay such charges and was unhappy with the contract terms, they should not have remained at the location.
Regarding ****** other claim, namely that our signage is insufficient, we have enclosed photographic evidence in this Evidence Pack to refute this.
Accordingly, we rejected ******' appeal as we believe that she entered into a contract which we are now upholding and, as such, this Parking Charge Notice remains outstanding.


There then follows copies of letters sent and the photographic evidence etc.... It also states the full amount of the charge is £85.00 but I am sure we have had another letter for a higher amount since this one. Will check that tomorrow..

Thanks again.

Cezly

Oh, and they did not respond to everything in the POPLA appeal, things such as ANPR Accuracy and ANPR Usage. not sure if this is relevant.

Cheers