CPS Midlands parking charge

FinedIndividual

I received a PCN in Nottingham on monday night and I was wondering how I should proceed. I was going to a restaurant and parked in a nearby car park of a carpet company. When I parked there I saw a sign in their window saying 'customer parking only' and as I had arrived at 8:30 and their closing time on Monday was 6pm, I thought it would be ok because I wouldn't be obstructing their customers. When I got back I found the PCN on my windshield. After I saw it my friends and I searched the car park for a couple mins to find a ticket machine in case we had missed it on arrival (We couldn't find one). However during the search we found the notice that talked about the car park being monitored 24 hours which we hadn't seen before because the notice was fairly dark and on a dark background in an unlit area of the car park. The reason given for the charge was "parked without displaying a valid ticket/permit"

I have pictures of the sign in the window but not the main notice (stupidly), though I could get some and also the sign and location is easy to see on google maps streetview.

Do I have grounds to appeal on the basis that no loss was incurred by me parking there? Or that the main notice was in an unlit area? Do I even have to respond at all as it's a private company?

Thanks for any help

Redx

all answered by the NEWBIES sticky thread, please read it and then come back with any questions that remain unsanswered

thank you

FinedIndividual

Sorry, I should have said I did read the newbies thread and that gives excellent information on how to appeal. I was wondering if I actually have grounds for appeal? Or is it simply a case of waiting the 3 weeks that the thread suggests (as CPS is an AOS member) and then sending them the pre written template regardless of circumstance?

Also, they state that they only consider postal appeals. Is that enforcable or can I appeal to the email listed on their website? Does it matter?

Redx

this is an unregulated industry, so if they say appeal by post only , then do so but get a free certificate of posting at the P.O.

as this is england, they can send the RK an NTK, the charge may be enforcible in court , yes they can ticket the vehicle on private land , yes you can appeal

appeal points are listed in the newbies sticky thread and in every popla case you can easily find on here

such as

flaws in the NTK
NOT A GPEOL
NO LANDOWNER CONTRACT
POOR SIGNAGE

EVERYBODY CAN APPEAL ON THOSE GROUNDS

the circumstances on the day are largely irrelevant

you should follow the advice in that NEWBIES thread, that is why it is there, plus it is up to date

you didnt say which AOS they are in (there are 2)

yes the template should be used to the PPC

if you do not respond, there could be a court case in the next 6 years , with all that entails

FinedIndividual

Hi again,

Thank you for your replies earlier in this thread, after reading through all the great info on this website I sent off my appeal (based on the template provided). I have just today received a response (which was dated the 13th but the post office stamp says the 14th). I have uploaded it here with the personal info redacted (though if it's necessary for you guys to see it I will change it )

imgur.com/a/pJO2d (sorry the forum wouldn't let me just put this as a link )


This is the first contact I have had since the PCN. No other NTK was issued, so does this count as the notice to keeper? I believe that the 14th would be 56 days exactly since the PCN was issued and today would be the 58th day since. I have also checked the POPLA number and it is a legitimate one with a deadline of Sun Oct 11 2015 as it was generated on the 13th sept. I had a look at the actual legislation that was linked on this website and it seemed to say that the NTK should be rather explicit in sayng that they have a right to pursue the driver and that they need the Drivers details which this particular correspondance does not?

So my questions are

Does this count as a NTK?

Where do I find the information about writing POPLA appeals? - this post

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4816822#3

seems to imply there is some information available on here, is it simply a case of putting together a letter based on those other threads and what applies here?

I noticed there is a new system for POPLA appeals, is it best to hold off until closer to the deadline while you fine people work out the best way to utilise the new system? Or is the thread currently on the front page already spot on?

Thanks so much again

FinedIndividual

Hi again, sorry for the bump, but does anyone have any info to point me in the right direction?

Umkomaas

http://m.imgur.com/a/pJO2d

That isn't a PoFA compliant NtK, and they have now missed the opportunity to hold the keeper liable - more than 56 days have elapsed and it's now too late for them to issue a compliant one, even if they had the nouse to write one. They have fallen in to the 'trap' set by Coupon-mad in her advice to send the initial appeal around day 21 for BPA AOS members who have issued a windscreen ticket.

The one major proviso is that you didn't declare who the driver was or alter/add to the initial appeal template - please confirm?

POPLA

There is no standard POPLA template, but your appeal needs to cover the following:

1. No keeper liability (but you need to check the NtK for correct dates and all requirements of PoFA have been included) - see here:
http://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/keeper-liability/

2. Signage
3. No Contract with landowner to pursue charges in their own name at court
4. No proprietary interest in the land
5. Unlawful Penalty Charge
6. ANPR Accuracy (if appropriate)
7. No genuine pre-estimate of loss (GPEOL)

Read very carefully post # 3 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky - it contains information important to your appeal.

There are plenty of examples of winning POPLA appeals across the forum; here are a couple of links for you to follow and research:

How to win at POPLA:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=62180281&postcount=15

Some of the appeals linked here are now becoming a little dated, so be careful to use one of the more recent ones as your guide to framing your own.

Please don't do a 'copy and dump' of the first thing that looks 'legal' enough, then expect regulars to pick it apart and amend it all for you. We won't do that, so you need to understand what you're copying, you need to proof read it and make sure any references you make (Beavis in particular) are up to date, and everything relates broadly to your parking event.

POPLA Decisions

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4488337

Read from the most recent backwards to get a feel for the appeal points on which POPLA Assessors are currently upholding appeals.

However (and importantly) things are changing on the POPLA front, with the service having been taken over by The Ombudsman Service Ltd. Please read the following links to understand the process you will need to follow over the next few weeks:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/popla-changeover-starts-tomorrow.html

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/new-popla-process.html

So the 'new' POPLA is up and running, so you need to get your appeal in by the deadline you've been given. We don't know how they will assess and adjudicate appeals, so we won't be able to give anything like the conditional assurance we have previously until we see several outputs from the new service.

HTH

FinedIndividual

Thank you for your reply, much appreciated

I did not alter the template appeal in any way other than my particulars (address at top, then Re:PCN number #, then name at bottom)

So my appeal should cover all of those items (except ANPR as I don't believe there was one on this site), even as they have not served a correct NtK? Should the arguments all be of equal standing or should I more focus on the lack of a NtK?

So when I get so when I get a moment I'm going to read all of those sources and appeals and then create a document that uses arguments from them in a way that makes sense and applies to me.

I'm right in saying that no NtK increases my chances of winning regardless of circumstance?

Umkomaas

It's not 'No NtK', you take their first postal communication as their (version of) NtK, and as it is woefully non-compliant, there is no keeper liability, they can only pursue the driver. You are under no obligation to tell them who the driver was - make sure you don't.

So this should be your first point - and you need to make sure this is watertight when you submit it. Flash it up here for regulars to read and critique.

Then you need to pile in all the other appeal points (above), other than ANPR if you know they've not used this technology to monitor entry/exit.

Please take your time to thoroughly research this - but don't miss the POPLA deadline - the more you understand the issues, the more successful you are likely to be.

FinedIndividual

Ok so had a few issues to deal with, how is this for my appeal?

Dear POPLA Assessor,

As the registered keeper of vehicle registration XXXX XXX, I am appealing against parking charge number XXXXXXX using POPLA appeal code XXXXXX. I am not liable for the parking charge on the grounds stated below, and I respectfully ask that all points are taken into consideration.

1. Non genuine pre-estimate of loss
2. No contract between driver/Inadequate signage
3. Flawed contract with landowner/Authority to issue PCNs
4. Unlawful penalty charge
5. Non-compliant Notice to Keeper


1. Non genuine pre-estimate of loss
The amount of £100 demanded by CPS (Midlands) LTD is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Parking charges cannot include business costs which would occur whether or not the alleged contravention took place. CPS (Midlands) LTD has provided no breakdown of how the sum of £100 has been arrived at based on the alleged parking contravention. As CPS (Midlands) LTD cannot show this is a genuine pre-estimate of loss, they have breached the BPA Code of Practice, which states that a charge for breach must wholly represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss flowing from the parking event. This therefore renders this charge unenforceable.

Given that CPS (Midlands) LTD charges the same lump sum for alleged contraventions at any time of day on any day of the week, regardless of whether the contravention was serious or trifling, it is clear that no regard has been paid to establishing that this charge is a genuine pre-estimate of loss, and instead the charge is punitive and is being enforced as a penalty.


2. No contract between driver/Inadequate signage

As a POPLA Assessor has said previously in an adjudication, “Once an Appellant submits that the terms of parking were not displayed clearly enough, the onus is then on the Operator to demonstrate that the signs at the time and location in question were sufficiently clear”. CPS (Midlands) LTD must prove that the driver actually saw, read and accepted the terms at the time the alleged contravention took place. Had this been the case, i.e. the driver had seen the terms and conditions of parking, it would be implied that a conscious decision was made by the driver to park in exchange for paying the extortionate fixed amount the Operator is now demanding rather than simply the nominal amount presumably due in a machine on site. The idea that any driver would accept these terms knowingly is perverse and beyond credibility, and so I dispute the existence of a contract between the driver and the Operator.

3. Flawed contract with landowner/Authority to issue PCNs
The BPA code of practice contains the following:

7 Written authorisation of the landowner
7.1 If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent) before you can start operating on the land in question. The authorisation must give you the authority to carry out all aspects of the management and enforcement of the site that you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner requires you to keep to the Code of Practice, and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges, through the courts if necessary.

CPS (Midlands) LTD does not own this car park and is merely an agent of the landowner or legal occupier. In its notice and rejection letters CPS (Midlands) LTD has provided me with no credible evidence that it is lawfully entitled to demand money from a driver or keeper. The only "evidence" that they have provided is a document they claim to be a contract between themselves and "Magpie Security Company". At no stage in this contract does it provide any evidence that they are the landowner nor does it provide any evidence that the contract is still current as it was dated as signed in 2012. I put CPS (Midlands) LTD to provide strict proof to POPLA that it has the proper legal authorisation from the landowner to contract with drivers and to enforce charges in its own name as creditor in the courts for breach of contract. I demand CPS (Midlands) LTD produce to POPLA the contemporaneous and unredacted contract between the landowner and the CPS (Midlands) LTD .


4. Unlawful penalty charge
CPS (Midlands) LTD cannot prove demonstrable loss or damage yet a breach of contract has been alleged. It is therefore clear that this Parking Charge Notice is an unlawful attempt at impersonating a legally enforceable parking ticket as issued by the Police or Local Councils. CPS (Midlands) LTD could have made clear the letter was an invoice or request for monies, yet it chose to word it as a 'Charge Notice' in an attempt for it to appear threatening and intimidating in order to extort money from unwitting members of the public.



5. Non-compliant Notice to Keeper
I have received only one correspondence from CPS (Midlands) LTD and I have assumed this to be the Notice to Keeper. The Notice to Keeper sent by CPS (Midlands) LTD to myself is not compliant in a number of ways. In particular with paragraph 9 (2)(e) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 in that it does not invite the keeper " to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver". The Operator is required to specifically offer the keeper a way of identifying the driver which they have not complied with. In fact at no stage in the NtK does the Operator mention that they do not know the name or current address of the driver at all which in itself is non-compliant according to paragraph 9 (2)(e) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012. Also with paragraph 9 (2)(h) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 in that it does not identify the creditor. The Operator is required to specifically "identify" the creditor, which requires words to the effect of "The creditor is ..... ". The keeper is entitled to know the party with whom any purported contract was made. CPS (Midlands) LTD has failed to do this and therefore has not fulfilled all the requirements necessary under POFA to allow it to attempt recovery of any charge from the keeper. I have included all correspondence between myself and the Operator since the initial PCN for perusal and contemplation.

FinedIndividual

Just realised I made an error and have editted it out!