UKPC parking ticket. To pay or Not to pay?

tjm247

Hello All,
I wonder if anyone can advice me on what to do with the parking ticket I got from UKPC. I was parked in a loading bay whilst collecting a dryer from Curry's PCworld in the Crown Point retail park Leeds.
I got it last bank holiday weekend 30/08/15 The car park was full as you can imagine.
Two cars were parked in the two allocated spaces in the collection bays but were just using the spaces simply to park and were not collecting anything as this was later confirmed by the store manager. (after I had got the ticket)
I had already assumed this was the case whilst driving around the car park and waiting around for half an hour for one of them to return and leave. After which I made the decision to park in between them as both cars were small and probably too small to place any appliances in ( but then I suppose they could have been collecting something small ) but they were both parked nose in first, Anyway, the only way I could get in to collect my dryer without causing a massive cue was to get in-between them which I did with plenty of room left at either side of my van and I caused no obstruction at all. I was in the store waiting for the assistant to bring the dryer from the back but all in all I was in the store for around 15mins. when I got it loaded I had the ticket attached which stated 'NOT PARKED CORRECTLY WITHIN THE MARKINGS OF THE BAY' which is true but under the circumstance it was all I could do without holding the whole crown point traffic up or having to call back at a later date. ( I have a family and washing needed drying)
The ticket says my vehicle was noticed at 14.36 and the ticket was issued at 14.36. Should their be a time allowance?
I went to the crown point managers office with my receipt from Curry's and one of the staff agreed it was unfair but said I would have to appeal it with UKPC which I then did as soon as I got home. I including a copy of my purchase receipt which had the time 14.56 (10mins difference). However, I got a letter from UKPC this morning saying the fine still stands due to me being parked across the bay.
My question now is do I just pay the £60 or appeal to POPLA and risk having to pay £100?
I have read the above threads and wonder if they would work even though In theory they are correct in the way I was parked...?
I can't seem to find the NEWBIE thread that's mentioned.
Never the less am I just !!!!ing in the wind by trying to appeal the fine?

Coupon-mad

I can't seem to find the NEWBIE thread that's mentioned.

It's near the top of the forum threads here, click on 'FORUM JUMP' on the right now (grey link top right and bottom right on this page right now). Click 'GO' next to forum jump and there are the sticky threads at the top. The Newbies thread is currently second on the list.

It's not a fine and anyone who pays UKPC is an idiot. Can't make it much clearer - even if you lose at POPLA you don't gave to actually PAY this bunch! You need to also find examples of UKPC POPLA appeals, so search this forum* for the obvious keywords 'UKPC POPLA'. DO not just try a POPLA appeal straight off, without running your POPLA appeal by us first (after researching it/copying from others). You have 28 days from the date of the rejection letter.




* The 'search this forum' facility is in the headings just above the sticky threads on the right, again after you click to page one using FORUM JUMP.



P.S. This is who you are dealing with:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-34172701

HTH

tjm247

I'm feeling stupid even writing this but I cant see anything saying 'FORUM JUMP' on the right of this page. top or bottom. All I can see on the right is; sign up for moneysaving deals, then, Welcome to our forum, Forum team contact, Martins Twitter then News Blog
Near the top I see a forum tools box then a search box then a box saying forum, go, then a advanced search box.
Sorry for being hard work but I just cant see anything that says forum jump on this page.

tjm247

Coupon-mad,
I have found this appeal letter. If I amend it slightly with my details will this do?


Dear POPLA,

POPLA Reference No: xxxxxxxx


I am the registered keeper of the vehicle, registration xxxxxx. I received a Notice to Keeper from UK Parking Control Ltd (UKPC) on xx/xx/xxxx for a parking charge of £60 issued on xx/xx/xxxxfor an alleged breach of contractual terms and conditions by the driver of the vehicle. I have denied all liability to UKPC. Following the rejection of my appeal to UKPC I wish to appeal to POPLA on the following grounds:
1. The parking charge of £60 does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss
2. UKPC have no proprietary interest in the land and no standing
3. The penalty charge is unlawful
4. The Notice to Keeper fails to establish ‘keeper liability’ under PoFA 2012
5. Signage does not comply with the BPA Code of Practice
A detailed explanation of these points is given below.


1) NO GENUINE PRE-ESTIMATE OF LOSS
The Notice to Keeper from UKPC alleges that the driver of the vehicle “breached the terms and conditions of parking” and so the charge levied must be damages that UKPC are seeking in redress.
The car park at which the alleged contract breach occurred is “free” and there was no parking charge levied. No damage nor obstruction was caused so there can have been no loss arising from this incident.
UKPC cannot demonstrate any initial quantifiable loss. The parking charge must be an estimate of likely losses flowing from the alleged breach in order to be potentially enforceable. Where there is an initial loss directly caused by the presence of a vehicle in breach of the conditions (e.g. loss of revenue from failure to pay a tariff) this loss will be obvious. An initial loss is fundamental to a parking charge and, without it, costs incurred by issuing the parking charge notice cannot be said to have been caused by the driver’s alleged breach. Heads of cost such as normal operational costs and tax-deductible back office functions, debt collection, etc. cannot possibly flow as a direct consequence of this parking event. UKPC would have been in the same position had the parking charge notice not been issued, and would have had many of the same business overheads even if no vehicles breached any terms at all.


2) CONTRACT WITH THE LANDOWNER — NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE BPA CODE OF PRACTICE AND NO LEGAL STATUS TO OFFER PARKING OR ENFORCE CHARGES
UKPC do not own the land mentioned in their Notice to Keeper and have not provided any evidence that they are lawfully entitled to demand money from a driver or keeper. I require UKPC to produce a copy of the contract with the landowner as I believe it is not compliant with the CoP and, without it, UKPC have no legal standing nor authority at this site which could impact on visiting drivers.
If UKPC produce a ‘witness statement’ I contend that there is no proof whatsoever that the alleged signatory has ever seen the relevant contract terms or, indeed, is even an employee of the landowner. I contend, if such a witness statement is submitted instead of the landowner contract itself, that this should be disregarded as unreliable and not proving full BPA compliance nor legal standing.


3) UNLAWFUL PENALTY CHARGE
Since there was no genuine loss or damage and a breach of contract has been alleged in a free car park, this ‘charge’ can only be considered an unlawful route of revenue generation. UKPC's own website states:
“Frequently Asked Questions
How much would it cost us to use your parking management services?
Nothing at all! We provide parking management services to our clients free of charge (subject to site survey).”
This indicates that UKPC generates revenues from these parking notices alone. Therefore, this is not a loss, rather a revenue source for them. Hence, it is against the principles of parking charges and should be quashed.


4) NOTICE TO KEEPER NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE POFA 2012
The Notice to Keeper fails to state the period of parking, only that the vehicle was seen at 16:21 on the day in question. Furthermore, under the terms of the Protection of Freedoms Act — specifically Schedule 4, paragraphs 8 and 9 — UKPC must identify the ‘creditor’ who is legally entitled to recover parking charges on their Notice to Keeper, but they have failed to do so.
Therefore, UKPC has not met the keeper liability requirements and, as a result, keeper liability does not apply. As the keeper of the vehicle I decline, as is my right, to provide the name of the driver(s) at the time. As UKPC have neither named the driver(s) nor provided any evidence as to who the driver(s) were, I submit I am not liable to any charge.


5) UNCLEAR, INADEQUATE AND NON-COMPLIANT SIGNAGE
Due to their high position and the barely legible size of the small print, the signs in this car park are very hard to read. I contend that the signs and any core parking terms that UKPC are relying upon were too small for the driver to discern when driving in and that the signs around the car park also fail to comply with the BPA Code of Practice. I require signage evidence in the form of a site map and dated photos of the signs at the time of the parking event. I would contend that the signs (wording, position and clarity) fail to properly inform the driver of the terms and any consequences for breach, as in the case of Excel Parking Services Ltd v Martin Cutts, 2011. As such, the signs were not so prominent that they ‘must’ have been seen by the driver — who would never have agreed to pay £100 in a free car park — and, therefore, I contend the elements of a contract were conspicuous by their absence.
Considering all of the above points, I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge dismissed.


Yours faithfully

ManxRed

Can you not see it under 'How to Contact Us' and the picture of four of MoneySavingExpert's finest? Upper right of this page?

Ralph-y

or just look top left here ...

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=163

Ralph:cool:

tunnelhunter

tjm, did you ever resolve this? I have a similar thing with UKPC at Crown Point at the minute and am at the POPLA-or-pay-£60 stage.