CP Plus Popla Appeal Help required please

Gokumdas

I have navigated around these forums a while and found the inspiration to reject the fine for parking in Morrisons' car park.

I was not the driver at the time, however have not let the company know this, The car park in question is in Paignton Morrisons. Where 3 hours are allowed for free. My spouse stayed 3.5 hours on this occasion and did visit the Morrisons but only spent a few pounds. We do however visit this supermarket every week and spend literally thousands there every year...

So far I have sent the initial letter rejecting the fine and asking for a Popla number, which has been replied to and now I guess I need some help to draft my Popla appeal itself.

I have also been into the store and complained to the Store Manager who said he could not do anything about it. I have the details of Morrisons CEO and will be writing to Dalton Philips as well.

Below are the correspondence to date. I would very much appreciate any expert advice about what to put in my Popla appeal.

Redx

read post #3 of the NEWBIES sticky thread, then click on the link and check for a suitable example from the list, copy and paste into notepad and adapt it accordingly

Gokumdas

Thanks I have all this just wanted to get a full list of Info, I am hoping that someone will see an error in their correspondence that I can pounce on.

However it seems as a new user I cannot post links within a thread, hmm

Redx

use tinypic and use a broken weblink to it (for pictures) of the INVOICE (its an INVOICE, NOT A FINE)

if you have read post #3 and have read some of the popla appeals in there, you have all you need to draft your own popla appeal , but you can post a redacted version on here for checking if you wish to

Gokumdas

Here is their rejection letter, which states that I have used a template letter a reason for rejecting my appeal:

DearSir

17Jul 2014
Thank you for your correspondence concerning the above stated Parking Charge Notice. This PCN was issued legally and correctly according to the British Parking Association Approved Operators Scheme. Given that the signage is displayed in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations, the fact that you were seemingly unaware of this is not considered a mitigating circumstance for appeal. We have noted that you have sent us a template letter. In light of this, on this occasion, your representations have been carefully considered and rejected. We can confirm that we will hold the charge at the current rate of £50for a further 14days from the date of this correspondence,after which the full amount will be due.
Although we have now rejected your appeal, youmay still have recourse to appeal to Parking On Private Land Appeals (POPLA), an independent appeals service. POPLA will only consider cases on the grounds that the Parking Charge exceeded the appropriate amount, that the vehicle was not improperly parked or had been stolen, or that you were otherwise not liable for the Parking Charge. To appeal to POPLA, please go to their website (popla) and follow the instructions. If you would rather deal with this matter by post, please contact our Appeals Office and we will send you the necessary paperwork. Your POPLAreference number is: xxxxx
Please note that if your appeal does not relate to the above criteria or is rejected by POPLA for any reason, you may be requested to pay the charge at the full amount and will no longer Qualifyfor payment at the reduced rate.
Yours faithfully
CP Plus Limited [3

Gokumdas

And hopefully here is my pcn

http: //rollingdiceink.co.uk/parking/PCN_Front.jpg

Gokumdas

This is the template i used to appeal initially:

Dear CPplus

I have received your parking 'invoice' impersonating a parking ticket. I decline your invitation to pay or name the driver, neither of which are required of me as the keeper of the vehicle. This is my appeal and all liability to your company is denied on the following basis:
A) The amount is neither a genuine tariff/fee for parking, nor is it based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to your company or the landowner.
You are not the landowner and do not have the standing to offer contracts to drivers nor to bring a claim in your own right.
C) Your signage was not sufficiently prominent nor clearly worded and consideration did not flow from both parties, so there was no contract formed. This is a non-negotiated and totally unexpected third party 'charge' foisted upon legitimate motorists who are not your customers and are not parties of equal bargaining power. Therefore ALL terms are required to be so prominent and the risk of a charge so transparent that the information in its entirety must have been seen/accepted by the driver. No reasonable person would have accepted such onerous parking terms and I contend the extortionate charge was not 'drawn to his attention in the most explicit way' (Lord Denning, Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd [1971] 2 QB 163, Court of Appeal): 'The customer is bound by those terms as long as they are sufficiently brought to his notice beforehand, but not otherwise. In {ticket cases of former times} the issue...was regarded as an offer by the company. That theory was, of course, a fiction. No customer in a thousand ever read the conditions. In order to give sufficient notice, it would need to be printed in red ink with a red hand pointing to it - or something equally startling.'

As you have failed to create any enforceable contract I suggest that you cancel this unjustified 'ticket'. If not, under your Trade Body's current Code of Practice you must issue a rejection letter which, in order to answer my appeal, must include:
1. The legal basis of your charge, which is not clear (i.e. breach, trespass or contractual fee?). As keeper, I cannot be expected to guess the basis of your allegation.
(i) if alleging breach of contract, please supply a breakdown of your alleged 'loss' and state the intention of your enforcement (i.e. deterrent or revenue?).
(ii) if alleging trespass, enclose evidence of the perpetrator, proof of the liquidated damages alleged and the calculation of this sum by the landholder.
(iii) if alleging 'contractual fee' I request a VAT invoice by return and your explanation of how you can allow drivers to park 'in breach' for a fee when your client originally contracted you in order to disallow and deter - not allow and profit from - unauthorised parking. I contend this charge is merely a penalty which is not recoverable in contract law (as found by Mr Recorder Gibson QC in the case of Civil Enforcement v McCafferty 3YK50188 (AP476) 21/2/2014 Appeal). Should you try to rely upon ParkingEye v Beavis & Wardley at independent appeal stage, I will of course point out that it was a flawed decision at small claim level so is not binding, and Mr Beavis is continuing his defence to the Court of Appeal. There is clearly no commercial justification for this punitive charge and no case law to support it.

2. Proof of your locus standi to offer contracts to drivers at this site and to bring a claim in your own right for this particular contravention. If you are not the landowner, I will need to see a copy of your contract, showing the restrictions, the charges, the dates and terms of business including any payments between yourself and your client and the definition of your status as agents or contractors and your assigned rights (if any). Such detail is necessary for me to make an informed decision. Failure to divulge your landowner contract (or heavily redacting it) will be deemed as withholding pertinent information and, of course, I will require it to be shown at independent appeal stage anyway. A witness statement will not suffice, nor a site agreement with a managing agent or other party who is not the landowner.

3. Your explanation of the consideration that you believe flowed from the driver, and from yourselves. Consideration from both sides is required for a contract.

4. A copy of the signage site map and close-up pictures of the signs in situ at the time, taken at a comparable time of day in similar light conditions.

5. The means to make an appeal to POPLA or the IAS. This must not be withheld or delayed, which would be a breach of the Code of Practice.

If you fail to simply cancel the charge or supply the means to independent appeal in your first reply you will also be reported to your applicable ATA and the DVLA. A certificate of posting will be obtained for all written communications for this appeal and complaint and I intend to claim my costs when I prevail.

Yours faithfully

Gokumdas

and here is a suitable template I am considering using to amend, Any extra adive would be most appreciated thank you

Dear Sir/Madam,
RE: POPLA XXXXXXXXXXXX

Without prejudice

Civil Parking Notice (CPN): XXXXXXXX
Vehicle Reg: XXXXXXXXX
Date of Issue: 30/04/2013
Company in question: The Car Parking Partnership (CPP)

On the above date, I (the keeper of the vehicle) was issued with a CPN for parking without a valid permit at Roehampton University. There were no signs anywhere near the car and no signs were observed on entry to the area. The signage was extremely poor, with there most significantly not being any signs at all around where the car was parked.

I challenged this notice on a number of issues. I then received a rejection with regards to the alleged contravention. Attached to the rejection was the POPLA form and verification code.

I would like to appeal this notice on the following grounds.

1. Lack of signage
2. No contract with the site that permits levying charges
3. Inappropriate parking charge
4. Prompt payment not 40% less
5. No breach/trespass

1. Lack of signage

There is/was categorically no contract between the driver and The Car Parking Partnership (CPP). No signs were observed. There were no large BPA standard signs when the car park was first entered therefore there was no idea of any alleged contract or restrictions.

There were no signs at all located near where the car was parked.

I require CPP to provide POPLA with evidence that its signage is compliant with BPA rules upon both entry and where the car in question was parked.

2. No contract with the site that permits levying charges

The CPP parking notice states that it has been served on behalf of the landowner. However, I doubt that CPP has the legal status and overriding right to pursue parking charge notices. I therefore require CPP to supply and POPLA to review:

• A copy of the current signed site agreement or contract with the landowner/occupier of that site
• A copy of the wording of the current imposed permit scheme with proof that the landowner has agreed to/been informed about it.
• A current map of all the areas and bays of that car park where the permit scheme is and is not applicable, as agreed with the landowner/occupier.
• Contemporaneous photos of the actual signs on site taken from the view of the driver of a car where the car in question was parked.

Furthermore, I require that the PPC show POPLA proof that they have the right to charge and pursue motorists (including threats of debt recovery and court action).

3. Inappropriate parking charge

The demand for a payment of £85 as noted within the Parking Charge is a punitive amount that has no relationship to the loss that would have been suffered by the Landowner. The BPA code of practice states:

19.5 If the parking charge that the driver is being asked to pay
is for a breach of contract or act of trespass, this charge
must be based on the genuine pre-estimate of loss that
you suffer.

19.6 If your parking charge is based upon a contractually
agreed sum, that charge cannot be punitive or
unreasonable.

I require CPP to provide a detailed breakdown of how the amount of the 'charge' was arrived at. I am aware from court rulings and previous POPLA adjudications that the cost of running the business may not be included in these pre-estimate losses.

4. Prompt payment discount not 40% less

In addition, CPP are also not compliant with the early payment discount clause of the BPA code of practice which states:

19.7 If prompt payment is made, you must offer a reduced
payment to reflect your reduced costs in collecting the
charge. The reduction in cost should be by at least 40% of
the full charge. ‘Prompt payment’ is defined as 14 days from
the date the driver or the keeper received the notice.


The discount that CPP offered for payment within 14 days was £60, 40% off of £85 is £51, a big difference to the £60 offered.

5. No breach/trespass

If there was no contract, then at most the allegation can only be a civil trespass. This is denied - and indeed the CPP ticket did not mention trespass nor breach, so there is no charge applicable. However, for the avoidance of doubt, if CPP do now try to allege that this is the nature of this 'charge' then the driver would be potentially only be liable for damages owed to the owner/occupier who may have suffered a loss. Since no ‘damage’ occurred in the car park and also given the fact that the car park was not completely full in short time the car was on site, there was in fact no loss at all and this charge is purely a profiteering penalty, out of all proportion.

With all this in mind, I require POPLA to inform CPP to cancel the CPN.

Yours faithfully,

Redx

edit your post to remove the popla code

also edit your pic to remove identifiers like your VRN too (at least 2 of them)

Gokumdas

Both done thank you

Redx

ok , here is the link http://rollingdiceink.co.uk/parking/PCN_Front.jpg

as for the popla appeal, cant see not a gpeol on your appeal so I would look for a more recent 2014 appeal that is more suyitable and has not a gpeol as point 1