So confused reg POPLA. PLS HELP

Dee140157

The letter does not refer to breach of contract but refers to you exceeding the free allowance, which may imply it, it on that I am not sure.

The entrance sign gives no indication of what ANPR will be used for, or that you are entering into a contractual charge etc. So very non complaint, so leave ANPR in definitely.

Coupon-mad

Dee140157 wrote: »

The letter does not refer to breach of contract but refers to you exceeding the free allowance, which may imply it, it on that I am not sure.

But the sign says 'to deter abuse' and the letter implies exactly the same, going on about 'serious problems' in the car park. So their charge is a deterrent (by their own admission in the signage wording) and that means CEL have to show the charge is a GPEOL.

Dee140157 wrote: »

The entrance sign gives no indication of what ANPR will be used for, or that you are entering into a contractual charge etc. So very non compliant, so leave ANPR in definitely.

Agreed.

bazster wrote: »

The way I read that sign Heron Foods customers are restricted to 45 minutes' parking, anyone else can park for as long as they wish!

Totally agree!

http://s1381.photobucket.com/user/sdedmd/media/IMG_2192_zpse03042b2.jpg.html?sort=3&o=0

To sd.

- point #5 needs bringing down to sit under point#4 in your top summary.

- Also I would add a bit to your second paragraph of your first appeal point, like this:

The demand for a payment of £100 is punitive, unreasonable, exceeds an appropriate amount, and has no relationship to any loss that could have been suffered by the Landowner.

I put Civil Enforcement to strict proof of the alleged loss including a detailed breakdown of how the amount of the “charge” was calculated. The Notice to Keeper letter refers to 'breach of contract' and the sign says the charge is to 'deter abuse' so the charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss - and I contend this charge certainly is not based on any such calculation.


- Also I would add a bit to your 'unclear signage' point, like this:

In addition, the signage for the terms & charges are in a particularly small font compared with the offer to park for 45 minutes for free. There is also no mention of what the ANPR data will be used for. The sign was purposefully unclear and did not provide a fair and clear offer for the customer. In fact, the way the only sign which does set out the restrictions has been drafted, it seems that the only clear message is that Heron Foods customers are restricted to 45 minutes' parking, but anyone else can park for as long as they wish because no restrictions are stated except the 45 minutes which applies to Heron Foods customers! As I am the registered keeper and was not the driver I do not know whether the driver was a customer of Heron Foods - if not then the sign does not apply at all, if yes then the charge represents no loss. Moreover, the entrance warning sign is particularly vague and evasive (see attached).


To be clear, I am NOT saying the remove any of the rest of your appeal and I think after these additions it's ready to be sent. Ask you son to help you submit the appeal online to POPLA and then to ad the evidence of your photos.

Dee140157

Thank you for clarifying this. I had a feeling I might have missed the obvious.

sd.

Thanks so much Coupon-mad and Dee.


To sd.

- point #5 needs bringing down to sit under point#4 in your top summary.

Do you mean the way it's set out?



- Also I would add a bit to your 'unclear signage' point, like this:

In addition, the signage for the terms & charges are in a particularly small font compared with the offer to park for 45 minutes for free. There is also no mention of what the ANPR data will be used for. The sign was purposefully unclear and did not provide a fair and clear offer for the customer. In fact, the way the only sign which does set out the restrictions has been drafted, it seems that the only clear message is that Heron Foods customers are restricted to 45 minutes' parking, but anyone else can park for as long as they wish because no restrictions are stated except the 45 minutes which applies to Heron Foods customers! As I am the registered keeper and was not the driver I do not know whether the driver was a customer of Heron Foods - if not then the sign does not apply at all, if yes then the charge represents no loss. Moreover, the entrance warning sign is particularly vague and evasive (see attached).

Can I add 'There is also no mention of what the ANPR data will be used for on the entrance sign'



To be clear, I am NOT saying the remove any of the rest of your appeal and I think after these additions it's ready to be sent. Ask you son to help you submit the appeal online to POPLA and then to ad the evidence of your photos.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks again for your help:)

Dee140157

Yes you can. But then it is pretty much good to go. Don't forget to sent the photo in!