Proof read POPLA appeal - ParkingEye Leisure World Southampton

Dee140157

This will be a good example for other town quays appealers to copy. All good points in there now and should see PE off.

From a purely personal point of view, I would be tempted to make point 6 point 1 and bump all the others down the list. Only because we know GPEOL will win it and PE probably won't turn up to POPLA anyway. But on the very off chance they do and the equally off chance the assessor is bored, he/she might actually give you a decision based on relevant land instead of No GPEOL

However that is a minor and actually very arguable point. To actually get a decision based on this in reality it would require someone who doesn't care if they don't succeed to do a one point appeal on the issue of relevant land. And since PE are very litigious they are sadly not necessarily the PPC to try it with. Some other PPCs are far less litigious so would not take it further to court. PE would.

So send it off, sit back and enjoy the rest of the summer and some time inSeptember expect a win!

BenefitMaster

Dee140157 wrote: »

However that is a minor and actually very arguable point. To actually get a decision based on this in reality it would require someone who doesn't care if they don't succeed to do a one point appeal on the issue of relevant land.

I did, and the OP cited my POPLA result in the appeal :-)

Dee140157

Oops. I read that as well and thought it a good point! :embarasse

BenefitMaster

Dee140157 wrote: »

Oops. I read that as well and thought it a good point! :embarasse

ParkingEye received a POPLA decision that Southampton Port is not relevant Land on 6 March 2014.

EVERY ticket they have issued since then has, in my opinion, been a case of criminal fraud. This is likely to be tested soon, as my car was at Town Quay again this weekend. If I receive a PCN citing Keeper Liability, I will demand that Hampshire Police investigate this attempted fraud by PE. :j :j :j

Guys_Dad

I would agree with Dee and put point 6 as point 1.

PE get lots of appeals and chances are when they see point 1 on GPEOL, the bored reader will say "Another GPEOL case, send them a rejection and POPLA code" inconveniencing you and making you do a POPLA appeal.

Shove "non POFA compliant land" at the front and they may cancel straight away.

Incidentally, I would spell out that you are "the registered keeper and have no liability to name the driver under POFA".

In addition, when you write "It is my understanding that ParkingEye are aware of this issue following the POPLA decision code 6060344057 which is for a nearby car park also exempt from the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 and therefore from keeper liability. This renders the issued PCN in question, defective."

You have not made it 100% clear that this car park and the one you were in are both covered by the link you have supplied. I am sure you are right, but your appeal fails to make the link clear to me, although it may for PE. But why take the risk?

The_Deep

BenefitMaster wrote: »

ParkingEye received a POPLA decision that Southampton Port is not relevant Land on 6 March 2014.

EVERY ticket they have issued since then has, in my opinion, been a case of criminal fraud. This is likely to be tested soon, as my car was at Town Quay again this weekend. If I receive a PCN citing Keeper Liability, I will demand that Hampshire Police investigate this attempted fraud by PE. :j :j :j

I would be inclined NOT to involve the Police and take the matter to Trading Standards. The police are convinced that parking on private land is a civil matter, whereas TS are well briefed on Contract. Also, the police will be far too busy investigating hate crimes and mowing down pedestrians and such.

You do not have to wait until your next ticket, if you can get someone to send you a copy of theirs that will surely be enough to convince TS. What they will often do is make a test purchase themselves.

Northlakes

Appeal letter typo First full point line 1 Reagards

BenefitMaster

The_Deep wrote: »

I would be inclined NOT to involve the Police and take the matter to Trading Standards. The police are convinced that parking on private land is a civil matter, whereas TS are well briefed on Contract. Also, the police will be far too busy investigating hate crimes and mowing down pedestrians and such.

You do not have to wait until your next ticket, if you can get someone to send you a copy of theirs that will surely be enough to convince TS. What they will often do is make a test purchase themselves.

Southampton TS are uninterested :mad:

The_Deep

Whether they are "interested" or not, they have a statutory duty to investigate.

Have you actually made a formal written complaint? If so and they have given you the bum's rush have you escalated the complaint?

If you have tried to conduct business over the telephone then you may well be urinating to windward.

http://www.southampton.gov.uk/Images/Southampton%20City%20Council%20complaints%20policy%20Feb%202014_tcm46-237001.pdf

denniswise9

To everyone on here, huge THANK YOU.

The case has been settled today in my favour:

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issuedincorrectly.

The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

Could not have won this appeal without the guides, threads and of course posters on here with all your ParkingEye defeating wisdom.

I owe you all a drink sometime!