Excel PCN driver left site

4consumerrights

no why would you?

Our company does appeals for people who for whatever reason cannot or do not want to do the appeals themselves - saving time stress and money with a guarantee

you have done your appeal - with those added amendments please and just submit to POPLA

make sure you do a rebuttal of evidence.

ap86

4consumerrights wrote: »

no why would you?

Our company does appeals for people who for whatever reason cannot or do not want to do the appeals themselves - saving time stress and money with a guarantee

you have done your appeal - with those added amendments please and just submit to POPLA

make sure you do a rebuttal of evidence.

this i presume you mean a come back if the appeal fails to acknowledge the purchase time on the receipt as being an invalid argument based on the time difference between the PCN and that which is on the purchase receipt? And you are talking about here the stuff you crossed out right?

Apologies for the daft questions and me naive nature, this is the first time i've had to deal with this and I want to make sure my appeal is successful!

Thanks in advance!

Coupon-mad

We mean when you see the PPC's evidence (if they defend your appeal to POPLA - some just cancel!) then you need to check what their 'evidence' is and rebut it by a final email to steer POPLA to see the issues!

ap86

Just a quick one. Is it worth me contacting the land owner first before putting in my POPLA? Admittedly I probably should have done this at the very beginning but I wasn't familiar with the process and whether you could contact the landowner until now

ColliesCarer

It's always worth contacting the landowner to seek cancellation but don't delay putting in your POPLA appeal.

Coupon-mad

ap86 wrote: »

Just a quick one. Is it worth me contacting the land owner first before putting in my POPLA? Admittedly I probably should have done this at the very beginning but I wasn't familiar with the process and whether you could contact the landowner until now

Do so AFTER you've sent your case to POPLA. Then you know you've cost the PPC £27 and that you'll win the appeal anyway even if the landowner doesn't step in.

ap86

So, I received my POPLA evidence pack through from excel. Maybe it's my pessimistic nature but I'm not so confident now!

Below is a summary of what they are saying. Thoughts and opinions much appreciated. The appeal isn't due to be held until 02/07/14 so not much I can do until then I don't think?

Cheers!

Contravention Date/Time:
31/01/2014 at 14:15
PCN Issue Date:
31/01/2014
Car Park/Site:
Crown Point Retail Park (Leeds)
Contravention:
[AO] – Walked off site
Reasons For Issue:
The Parking Attendant observed the appellant’s (Mr XXX) vehicle parked in a customer only car park after the driver had left the site complex.
The Parking Attendant observed the vehicle for a period of 15 minutes before issuing the Parking Charge Notice.
Signage:
The signage on site states, “Customer Only Parking whilst on site. Anyone seen to be parking and walking off site will be in breach of the Terms and Conditions”.
The signage on further states, “By parking on this private land you agree to pay a Parking Charge Notice for any action breaching the Terms and Conditions”.
There is 1 x Entrance Sign (750mm x 1500mm) and at least 21 x Information Signs (600mm x 1200mm) on site.
Summary of Evidence:
· The Crown Point car park is private land; motorists are allowed to enter that land for the purpose of parking their vehicle provided that they abide by any clearly displayed conditions of parking. It is clear that the terms of parking stated that a maximum stay of three hours was allowed, and that anyone seen to park and leave the site would face liability for a Parking Charge Notice.

· The signs on site clearly state: “Car park available for Crown Point Shopping Park customers only whilst shopping on site” and, “ Any Driver remaining in this car park 10 minutes after entry agrees in full to the Terms and Conditions”. (Section

· The signage on site also states: “Anyone parking and leaving/walking off site will result in the immediate issue of a Parking Charge Notice”. (Section

· The Parking Attendant observed the driver of the vehicle leaving the site complex, and endorsed the rear of the PCN: “Driver seen leaving site, customer car park”. You will note that the reverse of the PCN was signed by the Parking Attendant as a true and accurate statement of facts and is admissible as eveidence in court if so required (see Section: C).

· The appellant claims that he did not leave the site and remained within the Crown Point Retail Park complex using the shops. We asked the appellant for evidence of this and he provided two receipts for ASDA. However, we must stress that the PCN was issued at 14:15 on 31/01/2014. One of the receipts provided was for 30/01/2014, the day before the contravention was observed and the other was for the day of the contravention but at 16:46, over 2 hours after the PCN was issued. We therefore have reason to believe that the driver returned to his car and noticed the PCN, then entered the ASDA store and made the purchases.

· In his appeals the appellant questions the rights of Excel Parking Services Ltd to issue Parking Charge Notices at the Crown Point Retail Park and requests a copy of the contract with the landowner.
· A statement of authority signed by the landowner, which states, “The operator is authorised by the landowner to issue Parking Charge Notices where vehicles are parked on the site in a manner not permitted under the Terms and Conditions of parking” and, “The operator is authorised by the landowner to pursue the outstanding parking charges in accordance with the British Parking Association’s Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice”, can be found in Section G and is marked ‘Confidential’. [FONT=&quot]If the POPLA adjudicator requires further information not covered in this document, then it can be produced at a later date on request. [/FONT]T[FONT=&quot]his is provided for the sole purpose of evaluation of the information submitted herewith and, in consideration of receipt of this document, the recipient agrees to maintain such information in confidence and not to reproduce or otherwise disclose this information to any person.[/FONT]
· The appellant raises questions concerning the signage at the Crown Point Retail Park.
· There is 1 x Entrance Sign (750mm x 1500mm) and at least 21 x Information Signs (600mm x 1200mm) on site. Signage is clear and consise and sited at the entrance, exits and throughout the car park. (Section F)
· As established members of the British Parking Association (BPA), we adhere to their Code of Practice for Private Enforcement on Private Land and Unregulated Car Parks. This Code of Practice gives recommendations in regards to the signage within the car park; all signage at the Crown pont car park fully complies with those recommendations.
· In his appeal the appellant states that the parking charge is “not a genuine pre-estimate of loss”; Excel Parking Services Ltd would draw the adjudicator’s attention to the Parking Operators response to the appellant’s argument, contained in our statement, accompanying legal arguments and appendices in Section G.
· When parking on private land a motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide by the conditions of parking in return for permission to park. It is the motorist’s responsibility to ensure that he or she abides by any clearly displayed conditions of parking. It is clear that the terms of parking stated that motorists must not park and leave/walk off the site or the motorist would face liability for a Parking Charge Notice.
· A person can enter into a contract either by expressly agreeing to do so or by acting in such a way that he/she can be said to have implied agreement to enter into a contract. Where notice is given to a motorist of the consequences of parking in a particular area, by implications a motorist enters into a contract with Excel Parking Services Ltd and accepts the terms set out in the Notice by proceeding to park.

· By parking and then leaving the site on foot the appellant became liable for a Parking Charge Notice as per the Terms and Conditions displayed.
Key Events:
31/01/2014: PCN issued
26/02/2014: Appeal received via email
26/02/2014: Appeal acknowledged via email
03/03/2014: Further appeal received via email
03/03/2014: Further appeal acknowledged via email
02/04/2014: Holding letter sent via post
14/04/2014: Request of evidence sent via post
17/04/2014: Second further appeal received via email
17/04/2014: Second further appeal acknowledged via email
21/05/2014: Rejection letter via post
29/05/2014: POPLA notification received

Redx

please edit post #1 (edit -advanced) to change the thread title to Excel as those errors are buried in the posts and I found it strange the above said Excel , not PE (as this is all about excel)

you will probably win on not a gpeol in this case so the fact of going "off site" may not be considered due to their greediness in wanting a pound of flesh instead of 2 ounces

bazster

Thoughts? It's all bullpoo and you will win. Honestly, I don't know why they keep trying, they know they will lose.

ap86

Redx wrote: »

please edit post #1 (edit -advanced) to change the thread title to Excel as those errors are buried in the posts and I found it strange the above said Excel , not PE (as this is all about excel)

you will probably win on not a gpeol in this case so the fact of going "off site" may not be considered due to their greediness in wanting a pound of flesh instead of 2 ounces

Cheers for the edit tip.

GPEOL? What does that acronym stand for?!

I've not got a good feeling! My argument would be to this though that a passenger in the car was shopping on the site. And their argument of a deliberate purchase in lieu of getting the parking charge notice is a load of nonsense. genuinely.