Have things changed with PE appeal?

susi

BIG thank you to all who helped and advised, Im pleased to say the appeal was successful. Thank you all x

Coupon-mad

susi wrote: »

BIG thank you to all who helped and advised, Im pleased to say the appeal was successful. Thank you all x

Yay!

Susi, some are being lost now so it would really help if you could post the Assessor's whole decision (separate it into readable paragraphs if it copies as a wall of text) and put it with a link to this thread, in 'POPLA Decisions' at the top of the forum?

And well done - job done! Teamwork indeed.

susi

Thank you coupon-mad. We have just gone in and read the decision and to be honest its like they are talking about another case and dosent seem relevant to my friends case whatsoever???? I can post it up for you but we are baffled, its talking about filling in visitor permit forms and not parking in the correct bay? Shall I post it here first and see what you think??? Maybe we are missing something??

Redx

post it here and in the popla decisions sticky thread, just remove any personal details like your friends name and address, VRN details , reference details like case file number etc

just want to see what their decision says, even if you dont understand it others might and out it in laymans terms for us all to read and digest

well done too

susi

Thank you RedX this is taken from the online track appeal, Im assuming this is the info you want??

POPLA assessment and decision

17/02/2016

Verification Code


Decision
Successful

Assessor Name



Assessor summary of operator case
The operator states that it issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the basis that the appellant did not park in the correct bay.


Assessor summary of your case
The appellant states in concentrating on correctly filling in the visitor permit, he forgot he could only park in specific bays.


Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator states that it issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the basis that the appellant did not park in the correct bay. The appellant states in concentrating on correctly filling in the visitor permit, he forgot he could only park in specific bays. The burden of proof lies with the operator to demonstrate that the appellant did not meet the terms and conditions of the site. Section 18.3 of the British Parking Association’s (BPA) code of practice states “you (the operator) must place signs containing your specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle.” The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage at the site. The signage states, “A valid permit for this estate must be clearly displayed in front windscreen at all times.” However, the signage does not state that there are designated bays for specific permit types. As such, I must consider that the operator failed to meet the minimum standards set out in the BPA Code of Practice. In failing to so, I must consider the operator did not issue the PCN correctly. I note within their appeal, the appellant has raised concerns over the parking of another motorist. However, the actions of other motorists are not relevant to the appeal.

Redx

so what they are saying is the signage does not comply with the so called error the driver made

ie:- the signage states a permit should be shown - it was

the signage does not restrict the driver to only certain bays on the car park, so the pcn was produced in error as it stated restrictions were in place when there wernt any

ie:- they made up another rule that wasnt on the signage, the driver complied with the current signage, end of story

example - if they wanted to restrict you to bay 13 , it must say so

let us say your permit restricted you to only park in grey bays and not white bays, the signage must say so

susi

The thing is Redx they didnt even park, what is the comment about filling in a visitors permit? If you take a look at the appeal what we were trying to say is that the car park was used as a through road and parking didnt take place. We won either way so it dosent really matter but it just dosent tally with the appeal we sent in

Redx

I was only going off what the assessor said, I have not looked at your claim in detail, only what they said and what it means, even if it bears no relation to what your claim said