Luton airport apcoa pcn popla

badbrains

Apologies for the delay in posting this. I had to make sure the pcn was rescinded.
Read it carefully and amend if necessary.

1. Amount demanded is a penalty not a genuine pre-estimate of loss

The amount of the charge is disproportionate to the loss incurred by APCOA Parking Ltd and is punitive, contravening the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1997. I also consider the PCN to be a penalty because APCOA Parking Ltd have alleged a breach of terms and conditions and yet have not quantified their alleged loss (which cannot include business running costs nor the POPLA fee)

2. Not relevant Land under POFA 2012; no registered keeper liability

Sites designated as Airports by the Secretary of State are subject to statutory control in the form of byelaws. POFA 2012 does not apply because land subject to statutory control is not 'relevant land' - this was found as fact by Senior Assessor Chris Adamson in POPLA ref 6060164050. The driver has not been identified, therefore as registered keeper I cannot lawfully be held liable for this charge. If APCOA argue otherwise then they must produce the byelaws and maps to show that this part of the Airport is somehow exempt from statutory control. The onus falls upon APCOA to demonstrate this and I put them to strict proof on this point.

However, even if this Operator counters the above point, there is still no keeper liability because the notice to keeper (NTK) is not valid. It fails to meet the requirements of paragraph 9 of Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012. The liability is not based in the law of contract but is created by the statute and the wording is prescriptive and mandatory.

The NTK issued by APCOA appears not to comply with the Act as follows:

(A) Paragraph 2(a) requires APCOA to ‘specify the vehicle’ and the 'period of parking'. The vehicle hasn’t been stated. A layman's interpretation means this requires a stated 'time period' during which the car was evidenced to be 'parked'. A 'period of parking' is not evidenced by CCTV photo’s captured the presence of a vehicle registration number off-road.

(B) Paragraphs 2(b), 2(c) and 2(d) require a Notice To Keeper (NTK) to “inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full” and to ''describe the parking charges due from the driver as at the end of that period, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay them arose (including the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made them payable'' and to ''specify the total amount of those parking charges that are unpaid, as at a time which is—(i)specified in the notice; and (ii) no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post or, as the case may be, handed to or left at a current address for service for the keeper''. I see no 'time' specified which falls between the date/time of the CCTV photo and the issue date of the NTK. Further, nothing is specified about any charge which could be described as 'unpaid' by the driver, before the day the NTK was issued invoicing me for another sum (which, whilst conveniently also described as a 'parking charge' is not capable of being 'unpaid parking charges' prior to the invoice). If there were no 'unpaid' parking charges then the NTK must still specify those as zero, to comply with 2(d).

A short stop is not parking for the purposes of POFA 2012.

3. Misleading and unclear signage

The alleged contravention, according to APCOA, is in 'breach of the terms and conditions of use of the Airport road infrastructure where signs are clearly displayed'. It would, however, appear that lack of signage at this location do not comply with road traffic regulations or their permitted variations and as such are misleading. They were not seen by the driver, and therefore do not comply with the BPA code of practice. APCOA are required to show evidence to the contrary. I would draw the assessor's attention to the 'No Stopping Zones' section of the Chief Adjudicator's First Annual POPLA Report 2013: ''It is therefore very important that any prohibition is clearly marked; bearing in mind that such signage has to be positioned, and be of such a size, as to be read by a motorist without having to stop to look at it. Signs on red routes, unlike those indicating most parking restrictions, are generally positioned to face oncoming traffic, rather than parallel to it.''

There is not clear signage at every entrance to the car park/ land stating the restrictions in force. There is no signage in the place where the vehicle was allegedly stopped or at the entrance to the area where allegedly stopped. The requirements are that clear signage must be erected at each entrance and additional signage installed throughout the area. As the signs were not seen no contract could have been entered with APCOA. In any case they do not have APCOAs name on them.

The vehicle is not causing an obstruction. It’s not preventing other persons or vehicles from moving or parking.

The BPA and APS logos are not clearly displayed on the signage despite it being a specific requirement for compliant signage.

4. Reasonable cause for requesting keeper details from DVLA

The BPA code of practice also says '20.14 When you serve a Notice to Keeper, you must also include information telling the keeper the ‘reasonable cause’ you had for asking the DVLA for their details.' The PCN does not provide this information; this does not comply with the BPA code point 20.14.

5. No landowner contract nor legal standing to form contracts or charge drivers

I do not believe that the Operator has demonstrated a proprietary interest in the land, because they have no legal possession which would give APCOA Parking Ltd any right to offer parking spaces, let alone allege a contract with third party customers of the lawful owner/occupiers. In addition, APCOA Parking Ltd's lack of title in this land means they have no legal standing to allege trespass or loss, if that is the basis of their charge. I require APCOA Parking Ltd to demonstrate their legal ownership of the land to POPLA. I contend that APCOA Parking Ltd is only an agent working for the owner and their signs do not help them to form a contract without any consideration capable of being offered. VCS -v-HMRC 2012 is the binding decision in the Upper Chamber which covers this issue with compelling statements of fact about this sort of business model. I believe there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles APCOA Parking Ltd to levy these charges and therefore it has no authority to issue parking charge notices (PCNs). This being the case, the burden of proof shifts to APCOA Parking Ltd to prove otherwise so I require that APCOA Parking Ltd produce a copy of their contract with the owner/occupier and that the POPLA adjudicator scrutinises it. Even if a basic contract is produced and mentions PCNs, the lack of ownership or assignment of title or interest in the land reduces any contract to one that exists simply on an agency basis between APCOA Parking Ltd and the owner/occupier, containing nothing that APCOA Parking Ltd can lawfully use in their own name as a mere agent, that could impact on a third party customer. I therefore kindly request that POPLA uphold my appeal and cancel this PCN.

Redx

well done, they dont like to contest a well drafted appeal

at the moment its only uncontested appeals that seem to be going through popla ( ie:- cancellations by the ppc)

Umkomaas

Whilst it's obvious that airport 'stopping' PPCs - APCOA, VCS and UKPPO - don't want this ever to go to court, it seems neither do they not want POPLA adjudicating on it.

APCOA are not contesting an appeal at POPLA, the other two have bailed out of the BPA to join the IPC - could that possibly be anything to do with the evidence that the IAS uncompromisingly backs the PPCs at appeals where POPLA never would?

The_Deep

The PPC quotes Beavis. Is this not precisely why C.E.L. are facing criminal charges in Aberdeen this week? .

Their inappropriate reference to Beavis should be reported to the BPA, and in writing to Trading Standards .

noyouturns

Hi all,

Just signed up to post as I have an issue with these too. Apologies in advance as I haven't yet read forum rules etc but hopefully shouldn't breach any rules.

Received a letter from APCOA regarding Luton Airport "Parking Charge Notice" as they say we have "alleged contravention of dropping off/picking up outside of a designated parking area."

There were no signs that I could see (I was not the driver) stating we were not allowed to stop the car for a matter of a few seconds. They have included 3 images of the vehicle and from them within 29 seconds shows the car has driven off.

I have looked at the letter they've sent and it doesn't say much about POPLA, just at the end of the letter, stating they may be engaged as a final avenue of recourse once APCOA's appeals process has been exhausted. They have given an email address which is addressed to themselves and they have stated all appeals must be directed to them in first instance.

If wishing to pay within 14 days it is £48 otherwise £80. The letter gives an address and the other option is a telephone number.

What I want to know is, am I or the driver liable to pay? Is this a real charge or is it one of those companies trying to make a quick few quid? The letter is addressed to the registered keeper and thats not myself or the driver.

Thank you in advance

yotmon

noyouturns wrote: »

Hi all,

Just signed up to post as I have an issue with these too. Apologies in advance as I haven't yet read forum rules etc but hopefully shouldn't breach any rules. Thank you in advance

You really need to read the newbies thread, plus open a new thread with what you have put here, otherwise it will get lost within.

Ralph-y

and seeing as you are new to forums ....

newbie thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822

and landing / forum front page ... the start a new thread is top left

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

good luck

Ralph:cool: