Ukpc appeal rejected - POPLA next?

debs1505

UPDATE - appeal rejected
Ok guys and gals, received letter dated 16 March from UKPC rejecting our appeal. I've just returned from long haul flight and am a wee bit jet lagged so bear with me In brief, they raise the following:

A) You're parking charge does represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss. When you parked in contravention of the parking restrictions onsite, your contract with Ukpc was breached.......

The site in question has sufficient and clear signage......

C) Ukpc has contractual authority from the land owner to issue parking charges onsite........

D) All of Ukpc notices comply with the Protection of Freedom act 2012, the BPA code of practice and all other applicable laws and regulations.......

E) A contract can not be simply 'denied' after it has been validly constituted and then breached.......

It is denied that you have been given an 'unlawful' and 'unsolicited' invoice. You have been legally issued with a parking charge notice in line with the Protection of Freedom act 2012 and the BPA code of practise. Your offer of £18 per hour plus other expenses/damages for your time, if Ukpc continues to persure it's compensation is unambiguously rejected.......

The contract between Ukpc and youself has already concluded and all services have been supplied. There are no new obligations stemming from this contract. Attempting to cancel this contract via the Act is thus superfluous. In any case the breach and loss to Ukpc created by yourself occurred before this attempted cancellation........

A reply to your appeal does not represent acceptance of your raised points or any other offer. Your appeals is wholly redjected and it is urged that you make payment for your lawfully issued parking charge.

In light of the contents of this letter you now have a number of options-
1. Pay the parking charge at the reduced rate of £30
2. Make an appeal to POPLA within 28 days of this letter
3. If you choose to do nothing, the parking charge will automatically increase after 35 days from the date of this letter to £60 and the matter will be passed to our debt recovery agent.

That's the gist of it (it goes on for 2 pages!). Please help - jet lag has me brain dead!!

Thanks again to you knowledgeable folk, Deb

Fruitcake

debs1505 wrote: »

Default UPDATE - appeal rejected
Ok guys and gals, received letter dated 16 March from UKPC rejecting our appeal. I've just returned from long haul flight and am a wee bit jet lagged so bear with me In brief, they raise the following:

A) You're parking charge does represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss. When you parked in contravention of the parking restrictions onsite, your contract with Ukpc was breached.......

The site in question has sufficient and clear signage......

C) Ukpc has contractual authority from the land owner to issue parking charges onsite........

D) All of Ukpc notices comply with the Protection of Freedom act 2012, the BPA code of practice and all other applicable laws and regulations.......

E) A contract can not be simply 'denied' after it has been validly constituted and then breached.......

It is denied that you have been given an 'unlawful' and 'unsolicited' invoice. You have been legally issued with a parking charge notice in line with the Protection of Freedom act 2012 and the BPA code of practise. Your offer of £18 per hour plus other expenses/damages for your time, if Ukpc continues to persure it's compensation is unambiguously rejected.......

The contract between Ukpc and youself has already concluded and all services have been supplied. There are no new obligations stemming from this contract. Attempting to cancel this contract via the Act is thus superfluous. In any case the breach and loss to Ukpc created by yourself occurred before this attempted cancellation........

A reply to your appeal does not represent acceptance of your raised points or any other offer. Your appeals is wholly redjected and it is urged that you make payment for your lawfully issued parking charge.

In light of the contents of this letter you now have a number of options-
1. Pay the parking charge at the reduced rate of £30
2. Make an appeal to POPLA within 28 days of this letter
3. If you choose to do nothing, the parking charge will automatically increase after 35 days from the date of this letter to £60 and the matter will be passed to our debt recovery agent.

That's the gist of it (it goes on for 2 pages!). Please help - jet lag has me brain dead!!

Thanks again to you knowledgeable folk, Deb

Does it really say that? :rotfl:


Yes, use and adapt one of the How to Win at POPLA appeals in the NEWBIES thread and cost them 30 odd quid for the privilege. As long as you don't miss the appeal deadline and use all the points in the appeal you should win.


Check the PoPLA code is valid on the Parking Cowboys or Parking Prankster's website. If it isn't. complain to the BPA and DVLA.

debs1505

Checked on Parking Cowboys and the POPLA code does come up with date deadline of 13 April.

And yep, it really does say that!!!

Fruitcake

debs1505 wrote: »

Checked on Parking Cowboys and the code does come up with date deadline of 13 April.

And yep, it really does say that!!!

What a bunch of Numpties.


Perhaps you could include an additional appeal point to PoPLA that the rejection isn't written in understandable or plain English.

debs1505

Reading the whole letter fruitcake a lot of it doesn't make sense!! How about "Ukpc is entitled to pursue liquidated damages for this breach of contract to compensate for the loss it has suffered".

Anyway, do I just copy the POPLA appeal? Sorry to be so slow but my mind and body are 12 hours behind where they should be!! And do I use snail mail as I did for the first stage?

TDA

Fruitcake wrote: »

Does it really say that? :rotfl:

I doubt very much that it does.

More likely to be the same as this template response, which the OP appears to have butchered somewhat on transcribing...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5185449

debs1505

TDA wrote: »

I doubt very much that it does.

More likely to be the same as this template response, which the OP appears to have butchered somewhat on transcribing...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5185449

Excuse me?! I have not "butchered" the letter at all thank you! My letter and the letter on the link you posted BOTH say the bit highlighted in bold by fruitcake, if you care to check

TDA

debs1505 wrote: »

Excuse me?! I have not "butchered" the letter at all thank you! My letter and the letter on the link you posted BOTH say the bit highlighted in bold by fruitcake, if you care to check

I believe he has highlighted that bit because the lack of punctuation in your version makes it look like they are saying that they are rejecting their own claim for compensation. Certainly there is nothing strange about the use of the phrase "unambiguously rejected" in and of itself.

debs1505

TDA wrote: »

I believe he has highlighted that bit because the lack of punctuation in your version makes it look like they are saying that they are rejecting their own claim for compensation. Certainly there is nothing strange about the use of the phrase "unambiguously rejected" in and of itself.

I have copied exactly as it is, just not the whole text. I have not butchered a thing