Private Parking Appeals - Terrible Service

bazster

dr1981 wrote: »

Given the outcome of the Beavis case I wanted to understand if I should appeal or just pay the fine. If I lose its going to get very expensive!

Losing an appeal doesn't mean you have to pay!

dr1981_2

Thanks for the replys, the company was Meteor Parking (c/o VInci Park), now owned by Indigo Parking I believe.

A previous POPLA appeal was successful with the following justifiecation

"The Appellant has made several submissions however it is only necessary to consider one submission for the purposes of this appeal. This is the submission that the Operator has no authority from the Landowner to issue parking charges on the land.

The Operator has not provided a copy of a contract between itself and the Landowner which authorises it to operate at the site and to issue parking charges on its behalf; nor has it provided a signed witness statement confirming the existence of such a contract. Therefore, I cannot find the parking charge to be enforceable by the Operator in this case."

Should I use this as the basis of appeals?

Umkomaas

"The Appellant has made several submissions however it is only necessary to consider one submission for the purposes of this appeal. This is the submission that the Operator has no authority from the Landowner to issue parking charges on the land.

The Operator has not provided a copy of a contract between itself and the Landowner which authorises it to operate at the site and to issue parking charges on its behalf; nor has it provided a signed witness statement confirming the existence of such a contract. Therefore, I cannot find the parking charge to be enforceable by the Operator in this case."

This is almost starting to become the new GPEOL with many cases being won at the new POPLA. So yes, OP, it is one appeal point you should have in as standard (along with others like signage, no proprietory interest in the land, GPEOL (in a paid-for car park) and no keeper liability).

Where there is clear proof that PoFA 2012 doesn't apply, or the NtK is deficient, I'd make 'No Keeper Liability' the first point of appeal, closely followed in #2 spot with 'No Contract with the Landowner'.

Even if you get an appeal point 'wrong', ie the PPC produces evidence of proof, it doesn't do you irreparable harm, because other appeal points you raise will go in your favour if the PPC fails to provide proof.

Remember, every appeal point you raise, the PPC must rebut each one to 'win'. You only have to 'win' on one point and it's Game Over for the PPC.

What's not to [STRIKE]like[/STRIKE] appeal?

NOTE: for 'newbies' looking in at this advice, the above comments apply only in BPA/POPLA cases. Those cases involving the IPC/IAS are entirely different!

System

This is almost starting to become the new GPEOL with many cases being won at the new POPLA. So yes, OP, it is one appeal point you should have in as standard (along with others like signage, no proprietary interest in the land, GPEOL (in a paid-for car park) and no keeper liability).

They would rather lose that produce a contract that other PPC's could get a hold of. So press for an unredacted copy of the authorisation including the contract is held by Indigo. It is likely to be in the name of Vinci since they only changed name last month, but it is another hurdle for them.

Redx

the new popla has only been going a couple of months, with the Beavis case only concluded a month ago (on a free car park, not a paid for car park)

publish your popla draft on here so people can skim read it and give you critique , advice and help

if you win, you will show others the way, like you are asking to be shown

have a read of this Meteor one too https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5356701

4consumerrights

I know exactly who this OP is and they have received emails and will not be getting any refund as the appeals were completed and he received an email at just gone mid-day today.

I will not publicly embarrass the OP further.

Dave_TH

480 visits PA, a season ticket is needed not a moaning session on here

Quentin

4consumerrights wrote: »

I know exactly who this OP is and they have received emails and will not be getting any refund as the appeals were completed and he received an email at just gone mid-day today.

I will not publicly embarrass the OP further.

Not the finest example of how to deal with a complaint.

And certainly not why MSE has this forum (so you can use it to "publicly embarrass" a newbie so fed up they came here in desperation to try and get a response - which they apparently did!)

The_Deep

You have to admit 4CR that there has been a lot of dirty linen being aired here. I am totally confused as to who wears the white hats and who the black ones.

BTW, what happened in the Fort Dunlop saga?