Third party attempting to recover "debt" for PPC - 28 day limit still applicable?

secretmachines

keep us posted! i'm still waiting for my POPLA decision (they said on/around 3rd Nov) ... hopefully me posting this will mean I'll get an email in a few minutes

stargazer7

POPLA appeal lodged. JAS have submitted the following as their "Genuine Pre-Estimate of Loss". It stretches the bounds of plausibility to say the least (3 hours manager/director time on each and every case!). Their POPLA costs should be pro-rata anyway as only a small percentage of cases get that far.

Any other rebuttal points would be appreciated! Thanks.

The genuine pre-estimation of loss set out below refers to costs that we estimate, at the time of issuing the Parking Charge Notice, would be incurred in all cases.

• DVLA Fees / Processing Costs for this appeal cost is £13
• Expense of each appeal is for example Stationery includes postage and printing £3.50
• Parking Attendants salaries which includes Employers National Insurance and Tax (PCN recording and issuing) for each case 13.81
• Appeals Staff (call handling / appeals writing) for each case is £19.50
• Office Management to handle and maintain up-to-date Data which includes evidence of photos and information of parking charge notice putting together, dealing with appeals via email or writing also dealing with POPLA appeals for each case cost us £24.50
• IT system up keep to make sure all the information comes up correct and secure for each case cost us £19.69
• Total Genuine Pre-estimation of Loss for this case. £94.00

The genuine pre-estimation of loss detail summary below.

• Wages and Salaries including Employers NI Contributions - This is for the time it takes an attendant on the ground who patrols the car parks, having once identified a contravention, to initially issue and record the Parking Charge Notice’s and document, photograph and make notes of the transgression. We currently employ 12 attendants. We estimate that on average an attendant spends 10 - 15 minutes recording and issuing a Parking Charge Notice. The back office staff who manually check the issue of a Parking Charge Notice, examine and answer an appeal, take telephone questions or queries with regards to the issue of a Parking Charge Notice and take phone payments for the Parking Charge Notice, we estimate that it takes between 45 mins for each appeals to reply depending on the nature of the appeal. Some appeal do take a week if appellant is not satisfied with the answer, it take additional time if these appeals are also being dealt with over the phone and are passed to Supervisor or Managers. If the appeals goes to the Supervisor or Manager, it includes the cost of managers to examine and quality control an appeal reply, the compiling of a POPLA evidence pack, the writing of an appeal reply and the submission of the same and the answering of any further evidence submissions. It is estimated that three hours of manager’s time (two hours senior managers, 1 hour director level) are taken to check and approve the response to each appeal and examine and compile the POPLA evidence pack for submission. We have 12 dedicated car parking attendants and 10 dedicated members of staff.

• Professional Advice from the BPA - As from time to time we need to take advice and guidance from our appointed advisors to ensure an appeal is dealt with correctly. Which includes the British Parking Association and among others.
• Print, Postage and Stationary costs – These are incurred for any responses to an appeal which often number in 2 and 3 replies and not just a single response.
• DVLA Fees / Processing Costs - These are fixed costs to us at present at £3.50 per DVLA search via our appointed debt recovery/notice processing company.

Therefore contrary to the assumption of many motorists financial losses to the company are directly incurred as soon as a contravention to the terms of parking as advertised is made and a Parking Charge Notice is issued. With regards to justifying the amount of the Parking Charge Notice the considerable costs of dealing with an individual appeal demonstrate that there is a large cost (and therefore loss) to us as a company and we are therefore justified in the amount of Parking Charge Notice to cover these not inconsiderable costs.

Enforcement and the issue of Parking Charge Notice’s is recognised as asset protection and as the principal or lease holder of the site it is incumbent on us and part of our contractual responsibility to manage the facility to the best of our ability in order to either generate the maximum amount of revenue possible for the land owner or lease holder or agent or to keep our clients allocated parking clear of fly parkers and for the actual use of those who are entitled to park, be it an office allocated parking area, a retail park or a persons individual parking space or drive way.
As previously alluded there are a number of costs incurred in the continuous enforcement process that are a necessity in making sure drivers adhere to the parking T&Cs advertised and the chasing up of any outstanding and unpaid Parking Charge Notice’s. These include but are not restricted to;
Parking Charge Notice Amounts and the BPA Code of Practice

At present we comply with the Codes of Practice of British Parking Association as to what the level of a Parking Charge Notice’s can be charged. We choose to charge a sum of £94.00, and offer a reduced amount of £56.40 if paid within 14 days, as this early payment keeps our costs very low.

During October 2012 after significant pressure from Government and motoring/consumer organisations, the BPA reduced the maximum recommended charge for that a motorist should be expected to pay for a breach of the parking contract or for an act of trespass from £150 to £100. Despite the BPA being unable, due to prevailing legislation, to fix prices at this level, the actions of the Association were welcomed by all stakeholders. In this instance the charge being levied is within the recommendations set out within Clause 19.5 of the BPA Code of Practice.
This sum, and the calculations which have been made in setting it, has been approved and agreed by the landowner or his agent of the site.

Precedent in other cases

Parking Charges are fair and reasonable, and have been tested at the Court of Appeal. A charge of £75 was found by HHJ Hegarty QC in the case of Parking Eye v Somerfield Stores (2011) to be a reasonable charge, by which the motorist (when exceeding the specified time limit) would be contractually bound. See also Combined Parking Solutions v Dorrington (2012) and Combined Parking Solutions v Blackburn (2007). Further evidence, that parking charges cannot be viewed as penalties, can be found in Mayhook v National Car Parks and Fuller [2012], Combined Parking Solutions v Mr Stephen James Thomas [2008] and Combined Parking Solutions v De Brunner [2007]
In the POPLA evidence pack we have provided clear evidence that by staying at the location, the motorist has accepted all of the prevailing terms & conditions of the parking contract including the charges for not complying with the advertised terms and conditions. There are a large number of signs at the parking location, both at the entrance and throughout the site which offers the parking contract to the motorist, and sets out the terms and conditions of the parking area on which the operator will rely, and on which the motorist has agreed to be bound by which will become payable if the terms and conditions of parking are not met.

Coupon-mad

Have they bothered with a contract or witness statement form the retailer/landowner? If not, they lose! And they will lose anyway due to the fatally late and flawed wording in the NTK. And there was no initial loss so they cannot create a loss where none exists.

So no worries with this at all; POPLA will choose one of the above and you will win.

stargazer7

All they've supplied is a heavily redacted letter from Staples - who are not even their client in this case! (sounds like somebody's messed up there) - and who in any case say that they are not the landowner, and as the tenant would simply "assume that JAS would seek legal action to recover any debts".

Not worth the paper it's written on as far as I can see, even if this was a Staples car park.

Have made sure my rebuttal includes this point, and the one about no keeper liability, as they missed the 56-day window.

A complaint to the BPA is also going in about their breach of the CoP.

As far as the GPEOL goes, it sounds like they are one of many PPCs who are changing tack on this slightly after POPLA defeats.

secretmachines

how are you getting on stargazer?

success for me this morning!
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/67134386#Comment_67134386