RobinHood- Doncaster Airport, approach road PCN from VCS

novakt

I noticed that auto correcting tool did some mess with my document. From Point 3 started to renumbering as no1.
Never mind. in the document it is correct.

novakt

Ok . did some visual corrections to my email. Hope its digestible enough.

Coupon-mad

novakt wrote: »

Question : do I have to attach copy of my initial Appeal, PCN, and rejection of my soft Appeal in the email to POPLA???

No you don't - VCS have to supply that and they will email you and POPLA a big load of rubbish so be ready for their email!

Have you seen this? You could use the picture of the signs obscured by flags:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/prankster-operator-guide-to-winning-at.html

I have tidied your appeal up and put 'no GPEOL' first as it will win, and I have removed stuff that's not needed (I've even not bothered with the ANPR camera van point as IMHO you just don't need it):



Dear POPLA
POPLA verification code: xxxxxxxxx

An invoice "PARKING CHARGE NOTICE" of £100 was issued to me, as the keeper and driver of a vehicle alleged to have stopped on the roadway ''where stopping is prohibited".

My appeal points are:

1. The charge is not a Genuine Pre-estimate of Loss
2. VCS lacks standing to pursue charges or make contracts in their own right
3. No contravention of the Airport byelaws
4. Unreadable signage for a no-stopping zone (signs and lines are unclear)

Explained as follows:

1. The charge is not a Genuine Pre-estimate of Loss
The alleged ''contravention'' was in fact an emergency stop which lasted seconds and caused no damages or loss, nor is the charge commercially justified.

The First 15 minutes at the Doncaster Robin Hood Airport pick up/drop off car park are free so there was no loss of revenue. I require VCS to present a breakdown of their loss calculations. I have seen VCS' various GPEOL statements and the very fact that they keep changing their calculation to try to suit POPLA (and are now on 'version 4' I believe) proves that there was no genuine pre-estimate of loss calculated in advance.

They are merely trying to list their business costs to 'paint a picture' of a loss, to hide the fact that the charge levied is purely a fixed sum for profit. I am also surprised to see no mention of the fact that VCS normally pay their clients for the right to enforce tickets. If this is the case at this Airport site, then it will be shown in the unredacted landowner contract and it would be further proof that the GPEOL statement is disingenuous. VCS cannot have us believe that they pay for the right to issue charges here and then somehow they also make a further loss around £100 each time, and that the charges exist merely to claw that loss back. If that were the case this firm would be in receivership by now!

Further, the cost of running a team of back office staff cannot be claimed because even if no breaches occurred in any one day, the staff wages and NI costs would be the same. I have seen their protestations about their supposed 'GPEOL' (version 4) and it beggars belief that VCS have 28 staff members all actively engaged every single day purely on appeals. Many PCNs are never appealed and only 2% of them go as far as POPLA, therefore the true pro-rata calculation of staff time, per PCN, would be minuscule.

In fact, VCS' own website shows that their back office staff are NOT solely engaged in appeals work and, among other tasks, they administer permits, a time-consuming part of their job which bears no relation to my parking event:

http://vehiclecontrol.co.uk/services.html

''BACK OFFICE: Our industry-leading back office team processes PCNs, administers permits and serves as a contact centre for motorist enquiries.''

I would like to quote POPLA Assessor Chris Adamson, who stated in June 2014 upon seeing VCS' latest effort at a loss statement:

"I am not minded to accept that the charge in this case is commercially justified. In each case that I have seen from the higher courts, including those presented here by the Operator, it is made clear that a charge cannot be commercially justified where the dominant purpose of the charge is to deter the other party from breach. This is most clearly stated in Lordsvale Finance Plc vZambia [1996] QB 752, quoted approvingly at paragraph 15 in Cine Bank of Bes Filmcilik Ve Yapimcilik & Anor v United International Pictures & Ors [2003] EWHC Civ 1669 when Coleman J states a clause should not be struck down as a penalty, "if the increase could in the circumstances be explained as commercially justifiable, provided always that its dominant purpose was not to deter the other party from breach".

　
2. VCS lacks standing to pursue charges or make contracts with drivers in their own right
I require VCS to provide me with a full un-redacted copy of their contract which assigns them the proprietary rights to make contracts with drivers and to enforce charges in the courts. The BPA Code of Practice paragraph 7 requires those words when the Operator is not the landowner. I am not merely contesting VCS' right to 'issue PCNs'. Any contractor team at the Airport with a PC and printer could send out such letters but, of course, it does not follow that every Airport contractor can sue a driver. So, a mere witness statement or site agreement slip of paper, saying that VCS can 'issue' PCNs (i.e. send letters) will not be enough to rebut this appeal point which is about their lack of legal standing.

3. No contravention of the Airport byelaws
Byelaws apply to this entire Airport land and there was no contravention. The byelaws show parking controls apply to all private roads on the airport.

http://www.robinhoodairport.com/_assets/downloads/byelaws.pdf

''5. PROHIBITED ACTS ON PARTS OF THE AIRPORT TO WHICH THE ROAD TRAFFIC ENACTMENTS DO NOT APPLY
The following acts are prohibited on any part of the Airport to which the Road Traffic Enactments do not apply:
5(3) Obstruction: except in an emergency, leave or park a Vehicle or cause it to wait for a period in excess of the permitted time in an area where the period of waiting is restricted by Notice.''

As I have already explained in my representations to VCS, mine was an emergency stop caused by a temporary issue with the car which would have been dangerous to ignore. It is a fact that an emergency stop is exempt under the terms of the byelaws and indeed if I had continued to drive it would have breached these sections of the byelaws:

"Driving offences
5(1) Not to drive a Vehicle:
a. dangerously;
b. without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using that part of the Airport;

5(2) Not to cause danger with a Vehicle use, cause or permit to be used, any Vehicle in such a way as to cause or to be likely to cause, danger or nuisance to any person.''


　
4. Unreadable signage for a no-stopping zone (signs and lines are unclear)
VCS presented me with "so called" proof of "stopping on the roadway, where stopping is prohibited", however the photos show my car adjacent to a single white line which has no such meaning. As for the upright signs, many of these are obscured by flags and some are twisted away from the road, and even those that face a driver have too much small print and are placed far too high to be read in moving traffic. If VCS intend this road to be an urban 'clearway' then, under the BPA CoP, the signs must follow the TSRGD2002 to avoid misleading and confusing drivers. If VCS wanted to create a 'no-stopping zone' they need larger, clearer and unobscured repeater signs and double red or yellow lines.

In the Chief Adjudicator's first Annual POPLA Report 2013, there is a section about "No Stopping Zones" which states:
''it is therefore very important that any prohibition is clearly marked; bearing in mind that such signage has to be positioned, and be of such a size, as to be read by a motorist without having to stop to look at it.Signs on red routes, unlike those indicating most parking restrictions, are generally positioned to face oncoming traffic, rather than parallel to it".

martini.kiwi

Hello Coupon-mad, I recently got a parking ticket for stopping on a roadway where stopping is prohibited (at the entrance to Doncaster airport where I have stopped for 40 seconds to pick my wife and daughter up) and reading forums regarding this topic, I've seen that you know well what to do in these type of cases, which is why I would appreciate your help. My case is a little bit different than what I've been reading...In January 2015 I got a letter from Debt Recovery Plus Ltd informing me of this parking charge and asking to pay 160£. The reason why I didn't get anything before was that I've been moving few times over past 2 years and at the time that happened (Parking charge date: 09/05/2014) my mother in law died which is when I was picking up my wife from the airport as she went for the funeral and I just forgot to change my address at DVLA. I have already appealed to them and you know what their response was. The appeal that I've wrote was not good at all and the points that I made there were irrelevant (Unforunately I didn't do research before I did that ) and now I just don't know what to do and it's so hard to get help from anyone (Citizen advice or even solicitors were not very helpful) After reading the forums, I do get a little bit more about the Parking charge notices but I don't fully understand them. Could you please help me in any way possible with my case? If yes, could you private message me here please. Thank you in advance!

Folkiedave

Please start a new thread.