Warwick fine for parking in a private car park

andreauk2009

Dee140157 wrote: »

The first quoted information on Beavis goes into section 1 at the bottom of the No GPEOL information there.

Not sure I understand. The quoted text of my comment #30 is already at the bottom of section 1.

Dee140157 wrote: »

Did you look on the POPLA thread for examples of costs that cannot be include in a GPEOL ?

I looked at the POPLA example all over the week-end and I literally went crazy to understand all this legal stuff
So are you talking about some sort of compensation I should ask?

Dee140157 wrote: »

And have you done a search for Altrincham on the forum for the words Redx is referring to? These would be useful to quote in your point 3.

I never heard / read this before. I don't reckon this has been suggested (but I may be wrong at this stage).
What is this and where should I add it?

Thanks

andreauk2009

Ok, paragraph 3 changed as follow to include the Altrincham reference.

I still need to understand the first two points Dee140157 mentioned in his last message.

******
3. ANPR usage and grace period not properly declared - Following the receipt of the NTK, I have personally visited the site in question. There is nothing that makes aware drivers about the use of the ANPR, and there is no opportunity for drivers in moving traffic at the entrance to be 'informed that this technology is in use and what the Operator will use the data captured by ANPR cameras for'.

This is also in breach of Appendix B the BPA Code of Practice (Mandatory Entrance Signs) which requires signage with full terms to be readable at eye level for a driver in moving traffic on arrival.

Nevertheless I was able to see something to inform a 10 minutes countdown has commenced (e.g barriers).
The fact the ANPR recorded my vehicle to be on-site doesn't effectively mean that was parked since the very first moment. Being 'on-site' is not parking, and it is perfectly conceivable a delay of 1 minutes and 29 seconds while the driver was looking for, driving to a parking space and making manoeuvre considering the narrow space available.

I refer you to case 3JD08399 in the Altrincham!County Court where District Judge Hayes ruled that driving around looking for a space is not parking.

Redx

many parking companies give popla a list of costs (a breakdown of costs) that do not flow from the parking issue, like signage, staff wages etc, so the genuine pre estimate of loss refers to the costs of being parked there, not the overheads of a large business who have those same overheads regardless of if you park there or not (like they had today when you werent there)

so although you have written about it not being a gpeol, you clearly dont understand what a gpeol is if you think its compensation , as its actually restitution to put this company or landowner back into the position they should be in , like the costs of you being there plus a small recovery fee for chasing you for the loss incurred, (lets say £10 for ease of argument)

earlier I alluded to a court case in altrincham a few months ago (by ivor pecheque) where the judge said driving round and entering and exiting wasnt parking, so my point was to cite his words and that case in your defence (it was the infamous fistral beach in newquay)

so although you have cited several cases, you havent cited this one despite parking prankster blogging about it nor ivor pecheque talking about it on here

edit, your last post seems to have found it at last

Dee140157

Sorry was hurrying to reply to your post and got in a mess.

Ok
Appeal looking ok now. Beavis is in there. You will have Altrincham in there.
And you do mention overheads. So I think all ok to go when you put your edited post 3 in.

andreauk2009

Redx wrote: »

many parking companies give popla a list of costs (a breakdown of costs) that do not flow from the parking issue, like signage, staff wages etc, so the genuine pre estimate of loss refers to the costs of being parked there, not the overheads of a large business who have those same overheads regardless of if you park there or not (like they had today when you werent there)

so although you have written about it not being a gpeol, you clearly dont understand what a gpeol is if you think its compensation , as its actually restitution to put this company or landowner back into the position they should be in , like the costs of you being there plus a small recovery fee for chasing you for the loss incurred, (lets say £10 for ease of argument)

Well I asked because I wasn't sure. All I want is they get rid of this silly fine for 1 minute and 29 seconds driver failed to reach the paying machine!

andreauk2009

Dee140157 wrote: »

Appeal looking ok now. Beavis is in there. You will have Altrincham in there.
And you do mention overheads. So I think all ok to go when you put your edited post 3 in.

Great. Ok. My final question then. Where should I send it and how?
Should I use an email (if any) or again a standard letter with proof of delivery?

Redx

yeah, we know, and we agree with you , hence the help you are getting

nobody said it was an easy subject , but stick around for a few months or a year and it makes more sense, believe me

although sensible it isnt, nor fair , hence the recent daily mail campaign against it

they annoyed me by chasing my relatives last year (PE and Excel) , but we beat them off and I have helped many more since, to stop their evil money grabbing bullying of people like yourself

Redx

andreauk2009 wrote: »

Great. Ok. My final question then. Where should I send it and how?
Should I use an email (if any) or again a standard letter with proof of delivery?

email ? , NO , popla dont accept email appeals

its an online appeal on their site (tick all except stolen) and attach your appeal

or snail mail with free certificate of posting, but has to be there before the 28 day deadline

or both !

andreauk2009

Redx wrote: »

yeah, we know, and we agree with you , hence the help you are getting

And that is very very appreciated. I don't think I will be able to stick around for very long here for two reasons.
a) My english may be not that helpful being a non-native
b) I prefer supporting people in my area of expertise, which is something I do daily on IT forums

Edit. actually there is a third reason. I hope I won't find myself again in a similar situation as it ruined my weekend

Redx

you are doing a good job so far , believe me