ECP PCN now with DRP

Shadypines

Hi


Apologies for posting, but I have read the Newbie posts but cannot find the answer to my query.




ECP fine 11/5/14 in retail park exceeded time by est 30 mins as shopping with children and in pet store watching Rabbit show !


No 1st PCN received, first aware when received Notice to Keeper ECP letter - £90 charge 3/6/14
Appealed to ECP 6/6/14 ( not using template letters found here since ) - No reply
09/07/14 DRP letter received £150
14/7/14 responded to ECP complaining appeal had been made 6/6/14
7/8/14 - ECP responded , case with DRP and could not consider appeal
09/09/14 DRP reduced payment of offer £120 . Pymt due by 23/9 otherwise pass to solicitors to consider court proceedings.


My problem is I have no POPLA number to enable a 2nd appeal to take place in line with the NEWBIE Flowchart.


Any advice gratefully appreciated as I don't have the funds to pay this or deal with the stress of court action. Can I still appeal, if so to who and how?

Redx

ignore DRP

if you feel you have appealed in time to the ECP requests and invoices etc, complain to the BPA and include copies of all paperwork

ignore DRP, all covered in the debt collectors post in the newbies thread

all details are in the newbies thread

bazster

ECP are toothless, they don't take people to court.

Have you complained to the retailer? After all, presumably the entire point of putting on a rabbit show is that people stay to watch it, so they must bear their share of responsibility.

Coupon-mad

first aware when received Notice to Keeper ECP letter - £90 charge 3/6/14
Appealed to ECP 6/6/14 ( not using template letters found here since ) - No reply
09/07/14 DRP letter received £150
14/7/14 responded to ECP complaining appeal had been made 6/6/14
7/8/14 - ECP responded , case with DRP and could not consider appeal

You appealed in time and got no POPLA code. So complain to the BPA using the Steve Clark email address in the Newbies thread post #6.

Shadypines

Many Thanks for your responses.
In summary ( as i have already lost 1 reply tonight !) I am comiling a response to BPA to challenge the parking charge and hopefully get this overturned. I have reviewed reams of posts now and am totally confused. To make matters worse my MinLaw passed away last night and in addition to dealing with the funeral, kids and work I am struggling to compile a comprehensive response which will deliver a favoured outcome.
My draft response is as follows:
As the registered owner of this vehicle and I am notliable for this PCN. I wish for this charge to be dismissed or POPLA code providedfor an appeal to be made on the grounds outlined below:

1. The Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss

The demand for a payment of £120 ispunitive, unreasonable, exceeds an appropriate amount, and has no relationshipto any loss that could have been suffered by the Landowner. Hargreaves Ltd I put Civil Enforcement to strict proof of thealleged loss including a detailed breakdown of how the amount of the “charge”was calculated.
This Operator cannot demonstrate any initial quantifiable loss.The parking charge must be an estimate oflikely losses flowing from the alleged breach in order to be potentiallyenforceable. Where there is an initial loss directly caused by the presence ofa vehicle in breach of the conditions (e.g. loss of revenue from failure to paya tariff) this loss will be obvious. An initial loss is fundamental to a parkingchargeand, without it, costs incurred by issuing the parkingcharge notice cannot be said to have been caused by the driver's allegedbreach. Heads of cost such as normal operational costs and tax-deductible backoffice functions, debt collection, etc. cannot possibly flow as a direct consequenceof this parking event by a driver who wasfully authorised to be parked at that site.

The Operator would have been in the same position hadthe parkingcharge notice not been issued, and wouldhave had many of the same business overheads even if no PCNs were issued.Therefore, the sum they are seeking is not representative of any genuine lossincurred by either the landowner or the operator, flowing from this alleged parkingevent and the operator should make the terms of proving thecar is 'exempt', much clearer to the onsite staff and to drivers in order tomitigate their alleged losses and to avoid genuine customers being wronglyticketed.

2. Lack of standing/authority from landowner

BPA CoP paragraphs 7.1 & 7.2 dictate some of the required contract wording.I put EPC to strict proof of the contract terms with the actual landowner (notanother agent as they are not the landholder). EPC has no legal status toenforce this charge because there is neither assignment of rights to pursuePCNs in the courts in its own name nor standing to form contracts with driversitself. They do not own this car park and appear (at best) to have a barelicence to put signs up and 'ticket' vehicles onsite, merely acting as agents. No evidence has been supplied lawfully showingthat EPC are entitled to pursue these charges in their own right.

I require EPC to provide a full copy of the contemporaneous, signed & dated(unredacted) contract with the landowner. I say that any contract is notcompliant with the BPA Code of Practice and does not allow EPC (specifically)to issue proceedings for this sum for this alleged contravention in this carpark. Other PPC’s namely UKPC have previously failed in several attempted smallclaims in 2014 when it was exposed that only their principal had the right tostart court proceedings. I say this is likely to be typical of EPC contracts.In my case with this car park site, if EPC cannot show the landowner hasauthorised them to pursue PCNs in the court in their own name alone, they willfail to show they have standing and authority. In order to refute this it willnot be sufficient for the Operator merely to supply a site agreement or witnessstatement, as these do not show sufficient detail (such as the restrictions,charges and revenue sharing arrangements agreed with a landowner) and may wellbe signed by a non-landholder such as another agent. A redacted contract willnot refute my assertion either because the redaction could be the relevantwording about who can start court proceedings.

I contend it is wholly unreasonable to rely on barely readable signs in anattempt to profit by charging a disproportionate sum where no loss has beencaused by the act of parking. I put this Operator to strict proof to justify that theircharge, under the circumstances described, does not cause a significantimbalance to my detriment and to justify that the charge does not breach theUTCCRs and UCT Act.

3. The signage was not compliant with the BPA Code ofPractice so there was no valid contract formed between EPC and the driver

EPC are a mere agent and place their signs so high, they have failed toestablish the elements of a contract (consideration/offer and acceptance). EPChave no signage with full terms which could ever be readable at eye level, fora driver in moving traffic on arrival. If a contract is to be formed, uponentering the site a driver must be able to read, understand and agree to theterms and conditions. A driver could not stop in order to read the signs asthey enter the road as they by doing so they would block the junction. Anyalleged contract would be formed at the entrance to the premises, prior toparking. It is not formed after the vehicle has already been parked, as this istoo late.

4. Failure to receive the PCN original Notice to Keeper prevented me from appealing in the firstinstance.
You have failed to notify the registered keeper within anysuitable time scale so POFA 2012 no longer applies ??? ( Does this apply )
Yours sincerely

Does this cover all the areas I need to raise and content accurate . What else can i raise in Point 4 ?
Is this too comprehensive for BPA to challenge why ECP fail to provide a POPLA code?
Do i need to e mail DRP & ECP aswell, if so what do I tell them?

Any help gratefully appreciated , I am hoping to e mail this to BPA ASAP to try and conclude matters and remain within appeal time if POPLA needs to be submitted.

Any help gratefully appreciated

Redx

that doesnt look anything like a complaint to the BPA , sorry

most of it has nothing to do with the BPA and they cannot provide copies of contracts or landowner details, nor do they care about the £100 fee as they set that as the maximum charge allowed

you need to complain about the times and dates, and that its gone to DRP with no popla code from ECP , so allege a breach of CoP and ask them to investigate

then attach copies of all paperwork

no need for all of the other stuff that either is used at popla or in the ECP appeal

you appealed, got no popla code or cancellation (which you should have done within 35 days) and its gone to DRP, so write about that scenario

also complain to the retailer or landowner asap too

sorry to hear about all the other issues

good luck

Shadypines

Many thanks Redx. Agree its not a complaint, just an exhausted rant !


Can you signpost me to which part of the code of practice I need to refer to ?


Do I need to send correspondence to DRP, if so what will I need to state to defer next action as payment is due by 23/9 then further action being taken.

Umkomaas

Have a read of the full CoP as you may find other issues on which to complain to the BPA. But your main circumstances are covered in paras 20 through 23.

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/BPA_Code_of_Practice_-_February_2014_-_Version_4.pdf

Shadypines

Thank you re BPA, i'll get that send off today.

Do I need to send correspondence to DRP, if so what will I need to state to defer next action as payment is due by 23/9 then further action being taken.

Umkomaas

Advice on how to deal with debt collectors is covered in post #4 of the NEWBIES sticky, just go with that.

Don't jump to any crack of any whip threatened by DRP via deadlines - that's just their method to intimidate and cause you to panic. Ignore any deadline they impose - they can do NOTHING; you owe them NOTHING!

Nodding_Donkey

OP can I just add, as you seem to have missed it in the first answer


IGNORE DRP