Highview Parking scam query

brutal_deluxe

Hi guys,

A friend of mine is defending herself against a parking scam attack from a company claiming to be Highview Parking LTD.

She allegedly overstayed at a Tesco car park and received a 'charge notice' in the post to the registered keeper, demanding £70.

She replied with the following:

[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your letter,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Unfortunately the appellant (registered keeper) has declined to pay or disclose any driver details as this is not a requirement as the registered keeper of the vehicle. The registered keeper wishes to appeal against the charge notice outlined above and deny all liability to your company on the following grounds:[/FONT]

1. [FONT=&quot]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.[/FONT]
2. [FONT=&quot]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.[/FONT]
3. [FONT=&quot]No creditor identity. It has not been disclosed exactly who is making the claim and in what capacity.[/FONT]
4. [FONT=&quot]No contract. Your signage was not sufficiently prominent nor clearly worded and consideration did not flow from both parties, so there was no contract formed.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If you choose to uphold this ‘Charge Notice’ you must issue a rejection letter in reply to the appeal, explaining:[/FONT]

1. [FONT=&quot]The legal basis of your charge (i.e. breach, trespass or contractual fee). As keeper, the appellant cannot be expected to guess the basis of your allegation. Please provide a detailed breakdown of how the amount of the charge was calculated, solely in relation to this instance. The appellant is aware from Court rulings and previous POPLA adjudications that the cost of running the business may not be included in these pre-estimates of loss.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Proof of your locus standi to offer contracts to drivers at this site. A copy of the contract is required between ‘Highview Parking’ and the landowner/landholder that provides the necessary contractual written authority for the issue and enforcement of the ‘Charge Notice’.[/FONT]
2. [FONT=&quot]The appellant requires to know who the actual creditor is making this parking charge demand. It has not been disclosed exactly who is making the claim and in what capacity.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]4. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Your explanation of the consideration that you believe flowed from the driver, and from yourselves.[/FONT]
3. [FONT=&quot]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.[/FONT]
4. [FONT=&quot]The means to make an appeal to POPLA or the IAS.[/FONT]

They then replied with the following:


[FONT=&quot]Dear Madam,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your correspondence concerning your Charge Notice.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
This PCN was issued legally and correctly according to the British Parking Association Approved Operators Scheme.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
This charge is a genuine pre estimate of loss that is well within BPA guidelines, and we are fully authorised to operate on this site.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Given that the signage is displayed in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations,[/FONT][FONT=&quot]the fact that you were unaware of this is not considered a mitigating circumstance for appeal.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
In light of this, on this occasion, your representations have been carefully considered and rejected.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
We can confirm that we will hold the charge at the current rate for a further 14 days from the date of this correspondence, after which the full amount will be due. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Yours faithfully,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Highview Parking Limited

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]My question is:

Does she bother wasting her mouse-clicks with a POPLA appeal or not, and if so, should she just copy and paste what she originally sent to Highview Scam Cartel?

Thanks in advance!
[/FONT]

Redx

the popla appeals examples are linked in post #3 of the newbies sticky thread

pick the best one, adapt it, submit it , wait for popla to give this person a win

that is the correct procedure, and anyone who has done this with MSE or pepipoo forum help has won , parking prankster loves taking on highview and winning , because their view of the world is distorted as can be seen from their replies , which is why his appeals to them are too

just appeal it at popla and win, --- simples

ps:- no you dont use the same appeal letter at popla, that would be foolish

prosnap

Did she get a POPLA code?

Dee140157

And if she didn't you need to write back saying you do not wish to add anything further to appeal and to cancel or send POPLA code.

What is it with supermarkets these days that they want to upset their customers who spend too long in store?

brutal_deluxe

Well not copy and paste for POPLA, but just using the same appeal points, as the PCC have failed to answer any of them with anything other than "yes it is", "yes we are", "yes we have" etc.

Will have a look back at the previous POPLA's and advise her as necessary. P.S. Yes they supplied a code!

Thanks again!

Redx

well they would say that , wouldnt they ?

most popla appeals have 4 or more appeal points in them, whereas the template appeal doesnt

Coupon-mad

brutal_deluxe wrote: »

Well not copy and paste for POPLA, but just using the same appeal points, as the PCC have failed to answer any of them with anything other than "yes it is", "yes we are", "yes we have" etc.

Will have a look back at the previous POPLA's and advise her as necessary. P.S. Yes they supplied a code!

Just look at 'How to win at POPLA' and adapt any ANPR example written recently (plenty of ParkingEye examples there as well as CEL and G24 and Euro Car Parks, any of which can be tweaked to suit). Don't look back for Highview POPLA appeals that are months old.

bazster

Highview get all hurt and whiny when they lose at PoPLA. They used to tell PoPLA that they would be "spurred into immediate action" if they lost yet again, but no-one knows what that action is, lest it be making a cup of tea.

All of which of course makes it worth handing them another £27 PoPLA defeat.

Stroma

Yes appeal to popla to rid yourself of this. Though as highview IMO has no permission to do court from tesco ignore them could be an option, still that is just my opinion of never seeing a HIGHVIEW small claim.

brutal_deluxe

Thanks all.

OK so here's the appeal before she sends it, based on some of the info elsewhere on the forum..

Some notes btw:
- Alleged 'violation of terms and conditions displayed on the signage'.

Dear Sirs,

I wish to appeal the parking charge on the following grounds:

1) The amount is neither a genuine tariff/fee for parking, nor is it based upon any genuine pre-estimate of loss to Highview Parking or the Landowner. I believe that the £70 charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss or is unreasonable in proportion to the alleged 31 minute overstay, and should not be enforced. A full breakdown is required of how the amount of the charge was calculated purely in relation to this instance. It has been made aware from Court rulings and previous POPLA adjudications that the cost of running the business may not be included in these pre-estimates of loss.

2) Highview Parking is not the landowner and do not have the standing to offer contracts to drivers nor to bring a claim in their own right. I request a copy of the contract between Highview Parking and Tesco, containing relevant information which includes the necessary contractual written authority for the issue and enforcement of the Parking Charge Notice.

3) No creditor identity. The notice refers to Highview Parking LTD but It has not been disclosed exactly who is making the claim and in what capacity. I request to know who the actual creditor is making this £70 charge demand. It has not been disclosed exactly who is making the claim and in what capacity.

4) No contract. The signage was not sufficiently prominent nor clearly worded and consideration did not flow from both parties, so there was no contract formed. I have personally revisited the site in question. I believe the signs and any core parking terms that the parking company are relying upon were too high and too small for any driver to see, read or understand when driving into this car park. I request that the operator show evidence and signage map/photos on this point - specifically showing the height of the signs and where they are at the entrance, whether a driver still in a car can see and read them when deciding to drive in.

5) I believe the ANPR records are unreliable and not proof of one complete parking event. I require Highview Parking to present records which prove: a) the Manufacturers' stated % reliability of the exact ANPR system used here. b) the dates and times of when the cameras at this car park were checked, adjusted, calibrated, synchronised with the timer which stamps the photos and generally maintained to ensure the accuracy of the dates and times of any ANPR images.

This concludes my appeal.

Redx

looks nothing like a proper popla appeal to me, see my reply in post #2 , have a look through those examples, or search the forum for a recently approved highview popla appeal

look for any supermarket overstay popla appeal, or similar overstay appeal like an anpr PE appeal (like aldi or lidl or morrissons etc)