Private Company "PARKING CHARGE NOTICE" - on a company (leased) car

Redx

if they have not issued a popla code, complain to s clark at the BPA

give him copies of all correspondence and a timeline as above

let the BPA investigate it, complain about the lack of a popla code when the appeal was "in time"

if you have proof of posting, give him a copy of that too

if there is a popla code, USE IT within 3 weeks

check its expiry date on parking cowboys

wallington80

The gave me a POPLA Code on their response to my appeal.

Redx

wallington80 wrote: »

The gave me a POPLA Code on their response to my appeal.

so draft a popla appeal up then (after checking its validity and expiry date)

wallington80

Hi all, just an update for you. I finally had a response from POPLA, they have rejected my appeal!
As this is a leased company car, does anyone have any advice for me?

I hadn't informed the lease company as yet, because I got the appeal in to UK Parking Management before they sent any letters.

bod1467

Did POPLA say why your appeal was rejected?

Did you ever post your POPLA appeal here for critique? (If you used mitigating circumstances rather than points of law then you'd be bound to fail).

wallington80

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car, on these main grounds:

a). The sum does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term. It is a disguised penalty and not commercially justified.
b). As keeper I believe that the signs were not seen, the wording is ambiguous and the predominant purpose of your business model is intended to be a deterrent.
c). There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
d). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
e). There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.

Your clients should be thoroughly ashamed of the shoddy way you treat consumers visiting their premises. The landowner will be made fully aware of this matter and your response, which I will forward to their CEO when I complain in writing and via social media, as appropriate. Parking firms like yours fail to demonstrate even a basic understanding of customer service. The reputation of your business model appears to be more akin to a protection racket than 'parking management'. Your ATA may offer sound-bites about driving up standards or fight for motorists' rights but in reality they are not a regulator; they merely exist to represent the interests of paying members, in order to gain access to DVLA data. The public have no faith in the private parking industry and, as far as I have seen, your firm has not shown itself to be any different than the ex-clampers with whom you share a membership.

The purpose of this communication is:

1. Formal challenge
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. As such, you must either rely on the POFA 2012 or cancel the charge. I suggest you uphold this challenge now or alternatively, send a rejection letter - subject to accepting my claim for costs as clearly stated below, since you have no case.


2. ''Drop hands'' offer
The extravagant 'parking charge' is baseless but I realise that you may have incurred nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs to date, for researching the law and responding to your junk mail dressed up to impersonate a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15. Therefore, this is a formal “drop hands” offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days without further expense and I will not pursue you for my costs. If you persist then I will charge in full for my time at £18 per hour plus my out-of-pocket expenses and damages for harassment.

3. Notice of cancellation of contract
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered by you and certainly was not expressly agreed. This 'contract' is hereby cancelled and any obligations now end. If you offer - and if I decide to use - IAS or POPLA, then the contract ends immediately on the date of their decision (whatever the outcome) so my notice of cancellation still applies. The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations apply now to every consumer contract, save for a few exemptions, which parking contracts are not. It is the will of Parliament following the EU Consumer Rights Directive, that express consent is obtained for consumer contracts now - not implied consent - and that information is provided in a durable medium in advance.

You have failed to meet these requirements. The foisting of unexpected contracts like this on consumers, by stealth, is a thing of the past.

By replying to the challenge you are acknowledging receipt and acceptance of points 2 and 3 above. If you decide to persist with this unwarranted threat, I will be put to unnecessary expense and hours of time in appealing or defending this matter. As such, you will be liable for my costs and a pre-estimate of my loss - and in contrast with yours, mine is genuine - is that this sum will be likely to exceed £100.

I have kept proof of submission of this challenge. I look forward to your considered reply within 35 days.

Yours faithfully,

wallington80

I have received a response from CPM, basically disregarding my appeal letter, saying it is out of date.

here are the links:
hxxp://i59.tinypic.com/2j5l5qx.jpg[/IMG]
hxxp://i59.tinypic.com/voqr9s.jpg[/IMG]
hxxp://i59.tinypic.com/28am7i1.jpg[/IMG]
hxxp://i60.tinypic.com/9iydzp.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

wallington80

Appeal reasons:
I appealed this on the basis that there are no signs at the entrance of this car park, and upon visiting the car park for myself, I noticed that any signs they do have are on a wall and are approx. 2.5mtrs off the ground. and therefore very difficult to read

wallington80

The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor considered the evidence of both parties and determined that the appeal be refused.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
In order to avoid any further action by the operator, payment of the £90 parking charge should be made within 14 days.
Details of how to pay will appear on previous correspondence from the operator.
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
On 8 March 2015, a parking charge notice was applied to a vehicle with registration mark **O114SFE for parked in a permit area without displaying a permit.
The Operators’s case is that the terms and conditions of use of this site state that a valid permit is required to be clearly displayed in windscreen at all times and the vehicle in question was observed parked without complying with this requirement. They have enclosed photographic evidence of the vehicle and signage to support their submissions.
The Appellant’s case is that there are no signs displayed at the entrance of this car park and upon visiting the car park he noticed that the signs the Operator has are placed on a wall and are approximately 2.5 metres off the ground and therefore, they are difficult to read. The Appellant has enclosed photographic evidence of the area and signage to support his case.
The Operator rejected the Appellant’s representations because they state that by parked in a permit space without displaying a permit, the Appellant has breached the terms and conditions of use of the site. They advise that they are unable to erect a sign at the entrance of the car park as this is the public highway however, once drivers enter the car park there are many signs along the wall of the building and there are signs situated throughout the estate.Furthermore, they say that they signs are in line with the BPA Code of Practice.
I note the Appellant’s submissions, nevertheless, his submissions do not constitute grounds to allow the appeal as the terms and conditions of parking have been contravened. I find that although there does not appear a sign displayed at the entrance, the Operator’s evidence shows that there appear to be other signs displayed throughout the estate and the vehicle in question was parked in proximity of a warning sign that appears to be correctly displayed and would have been legible to the Appellant at the time of parking.
Considering carefully all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, by parked in a permit area without displaying a permit, there occurred a breach of the car park conditions to which the Appellant have deemed to have accepted when he parked the vehicle at this site. Accordingly, I refuse this appeal.
Assessor

** this is not my Reg number, they have mistyped here

wallington80

[IMG][/img][IMG]hxxp://i57.tinypic.com/mme64n.jpg[/IMG]