Apcoa pcn luton airport

Hertsrwf_2

Hello,
I received a pcn from apcoa for picking up a passenger outside of the drop off zone on 30/04/14. The picture shows my car in the queue for the drop off zone with nothing behind. As my passenger had no baggage, she just got into the car and i drove off, reducing further the congestion caused by their £2 charge. I appealed using your initial letter, which has now been rejected (surprise surprise) by apcoa. I have the details to appeal to popla. Should i emphasise to them that the vehicle is shown entering the queue for the drop off zone and that the driver cannot be held responsible for the passenger entering the car?
Also, the photograph of the sign with the warning on it, is not the one in the location of where the car is pictured. It is by the holiday inn hotel, with control tower in the distance.

Redx

just use the search word apcoa and luton and airport , find a recent popla appeal that was approved by this forum, copy and paste it into notepad , add anything relevant to your case, then use it to appeal to popla

there are DOZENS of examples for luton airport and apcoa

a driver is always responsible for what happens in a car, as the driver is in charge of it, so ignore that part

signage is part of your appeal so check what is said in those other appeals as well as what you mentioned above and yes you can include it

dropping off and picking up is not parking , so parking charges do not apply , neither does POFA 2012 either

popla do not consider any mitigation so most of what you mentioned will not be considered at all if you use it in your appeal and no you will not win on those points you raised apart from signage

the most likely winner is not a gpeol , although they may consider the signage issue or non-pofa 2012 liability , but I would put my money on the "not a gpeol" same as all the other successful appeals

The_Deep

a driver is always responsible for what happens in a car, ...

So, if a passenger has a heart attack, the driver is responsible? If a passenger throws a fag end out the window, the driver is responsible. In this instance how would the driver have been able to prevent the passenger stepping out of the car?

Redx

The_Deep wrote: »

a driver is always responsible for what happens in a car, ...

So, if a passenger has a heart attack, the driver is responsible? If a passenger throws a fag end out the window, the driver is responsible.

In this instance how would the driver have been able to prevent the passenger stepping out of the car?

in this instance , the passenger actually GOT INTO THE CAR , which is not possible if the door locks were applied by the driver which is usual practice for most people to stop ingress by car jackers , idiots thinking you are a taxi or to steal your belongings , so the door being unlocked is down to the driver who did not lock it and so allowed the scenario in post #1 to happen - the highway code expects a driver to have hazard awareness and to drive in such a manner as to prevent issues occurring which would include somebody getting into your car unless authorised to do so , so in this case its collusion

if a passenger threw a fag end out of a window and hurt somebody then the driver is jointly responsible because as I said (and you ignored) , the driver is in charge of the car , the same would apply if said passenger opened a car door and hurt a pedestrian or another motorist - the driver is held to be jointly responsible

the same would apply if the passenger opened the door to get out and caused injury or damage to another person or vehicle , the driver is the one the third party claims from (not the passenger) , but the driver could sue his own passenger if they wanted redress from that passenger

clearly the heart attack scenario is an "act of god" so is a stupid and irrelevant statement

the driver was in a "drop off point" so nobody should be getting in , also the driver should not drive off if a passenger has jumped in , same as he is in charge of them "buckling up" too , and would and should refuse to drive off if they havent fastened their seatbelt , its in the highway code and is also common sense too , seeing as he would not know a passenger needed picking up at a drop off point without collusion by both parties

just a shame you decide (as usual) not to answer the OP and their questions but to troll answers, hence my "troll" of your reply and the fact you did not read post #1 properly in your haste to belittle mine

The_Deep

I am not trolling you, I am calling you to account for sweeping statements which you cannot substantiate. You obviously feel threatened when questioned so I suggest a little less dogmatism and a closer adherence to the facts.

First you state that a driver is always responsible for what happens in a car, but when I mention heart attacks you backtrack.

As for locking the car while in motion, not every car on the road has this facility, and not every driver, certainly the more elderly ones, may be aware of it.

nigelbb

Redx wrote: »

in this instance , the passenger actually GOT INTO THE CAR , which is not possible if the door locks were applied by the driver which is usual practice for most people to stop ingress by car jackers , idiots thinking you are a taxi or to steal your belongings

I am obviously not "most people" as I never bother to lock the doors unless I am leaving the car unattended. It's much safer in the case of an accident if the doors are unlocked so that they can be opened easily by rescuers.

BTW re

a driver is always responsible for what happens in a car,

Who is responsible if a passenger aged over 14 fails to wear a seat belt? Hint - it's not the driver who gets fined.

The_Deep

Ah, diddums.

The_Deep

Red, a word of advice, when in a hole, stop digging.

Redx

The_Deep wrote: »

Red, a word of advice, when in a hole, stop digging.

you should know as a solicitor advised you of this when you slagged off lainiee here https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4802567

clearly it wasnt taken on board despite your diplomatic career sir humphrey

this thread is either about car jacking or collusion, neither of which is relevant to apcoa or luton airport but the OP brought it up so I made a comment which I stand by despite the pedantry

nigelbb

Redx wrote: »

how condescendingly pompous and pedantic of you ,yet another person like thedeep (john) who trolls replies like mine instead of helping the OP with their problems (but he failed to get his facts right due to not reading the question)

I hope you reached your "brownie points" total this week so you get a blue peter badge too

!!!!!! do you need to be so personally offensive for? I made a perfectly reasonable comment on a thread yet because it contradicts your opinion you resort to abuse. This is a discussion forum. We discuss. Threads drift. Most of us wouldn't bother to contribute if there wasn't an element of conversation rather than just Question:Answer.

Why get so defensive just because you get corrected after making a palpably inaccurate statement like "a driver is always responsible for what happens in a car"?

nigelbb

Redx wrote: »

because you decided to troll the replies like mine instead of dealing with the points being made , typical of trolling a reply in order to take the thread off topic instead of dealing with the issue at hand

You are very sensitive about being called out for being in the wrong. Is that why you persist in being so offensive?

I have contributed plenty to aiding OPs both on & off forum. I didn't come here to be insulted & my life is busy enough that I already spend way more than enough time on this forum. I really can't be arsed to contribute any more when pompous gits like you get personal about simple throwaway comments. It's a DISCUSSION forum. I wasn't aiming jibes at anyone.