Civil Enforcement LTD - How to POPLA ?

adrianfisherpayne

ManxRed wrote: »

Did you get any pictures of the signs? Or did they include any with their evidence?

What do they say? I feel sure the wording won't be sufficient to offer a contractual service for parking.

Hi, they provided a picture of the sign which reads
"you are not allowed to park for longer than 1 hour. If you break thisrruleyyou will be charged £90 (reduced to £40 if paid within 14 days) to settle this charge at a further reduced rate call......... Before leaving. Additional costs will be incurred if payment is not received within28 ddays. We use anpr cameras to monitor this site and will applyttotthe dvla toiobtain yourdetails "

bod1467

It's a deterrent charge, so not a genuine offer to contract. (Break = breach = charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss).

adrianfisherpayne

bod1467 wrote: »

It's a deterrent charge, so not a genuine offer to contract. (Break = breach = charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss).

It's a worry then that they have won a case in this exact car park against the Genuine pre estimated loss! Which they have sent a copy in of the previous POPLA assessors letter stating it was a "considered contract"

ManxRed

Presumably they didn't include the 100's of cases they've lost at POPLA due to GPEOL?

I'm willing to bet that the one they've included is one where they submitted a bogus calculation of their GPEOL and the appellant either didn't receive it, or didn't rebut it. It has happened.

The phrase 'break the rules' equates to a breach of contract, not an agreement to pay for a service, hence the charge is for damages for breach and must equate to a genuine pre-estimate of loss. You cannot agree to enter a contract which allows you to 'break rules', it's not legally possible.

bod1467

I think I remember that case, and I think Manx is right ... the appellant didn't rebut the GPEoL calculation. (It may also have been a new assessor, so they weren't properly aware of GPEoL). If you search the POPLA Decisions thread you might find it.

Ryan_Bryan

Rule One adrianfisherpayne. The PPCs lie. As ManxRed mentioned CEL lose plenty of GPEOL cases.

ManxRed

You need to go back to POPLA and point this out though.

Point out that 'break the rules' cannot possibly be construed as an invitation to purchase parking services (contractual agreement) - the language clearly indicates that the charge is in relation to a breach of terms and conditions.

Therefore the charge MUST represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, which it clearly doesn't.

adrianfisherpayne

ManxRed wrote: »

You need to go back to POPLA and point this out though.

Point out that 'break the rules' cannot possibly be construed as an invitation to purchase parking services (contractual agreement) - the language clearly indicates that the charge is in relation to a breach of terms and conditions.

Therefore the charge MUST represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, which it clearly doesn't.

How do I go back to them?

Redx

adrianfisherpayne wrote: »

How do I go back to them?

you go back on their website and add your reference and attach any rebuttals

email may also work too

as would a snail mail letter

not hard really