UKPC charge for leaving site

Underwriter86

Hi,

Firstly, thank you to everybody who's put together the invaluable guides on this website. Thank God I didn't shoot from the hip and ring UKPC when I found out about the ticket.

I've read the stickies and am about to follow your advice to send the standard template appeal - I can do this any day before 8th January. Before I do, I have a question which I haven't seen answered -I apologise if the answer is here somewhere.

- there seem to be some examples on here of people using non standard first appeals that have caused UKPC in particular to cancel charges at first appeal. Is there any merit in writing out a full appeal of all my major points - being exceptionally careful to word it in such a way that it's clear throughout I'm appealing as the keeper not the driver - in the hope that they will see I mean business and fold?

The reason I ask is that in the process of reading up on this I made notes which mean I've got what I think are the main appeal points for the POPLA stage ready.

The circumstances are as follows. A charge notice was issued for leaving the site at a retail park. I have a receipt demonstrating that a purchase was made three minutes before the ticket was issued. The main points of my appeal, if I've read deeply enough, are:

1) charge isn't a genuine pre-estimate of loss and UKPC should be asked to demonstrate that the driver leaving the site led to the landowner incurring a loss equivalent to the charge. (Which I can't imagine they could possibly manage without including their normal operating costs)

2) they should have attempted to mitigate any potential loss prior to it occurring by warning the driver - something that I think would be hard to argue from their side given the short time between the purchase and the charge notice.

3) signage not seen/terms unclear. (hxxps://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwbqG7kOEaeXTy1hRWQtUzVvcGs). I need to work on this one but I see several issues - whether or not they're all relevant I'm unsure.
- not black text on white background
- leaving the site not listed alongside the main points of not exceeding 90 minutes and parking within the bays, but mentioned in a body of text and before the wording stating the amount of the charge (which has been amended in smaller font than the rest of the sign)
- poor lighting
- no definition of "this site" or boundary markings. (I would also want to add that there is a lack of signage at all possible exit points warning of the site boundary but wonder if this contradicts the fact I'm claiming the site boundary isn't clear?)

4) lack of evidence of their contract with the landowner giving them authority to issue charges or the circumstances under which a charge can be cancelled.

5) this one I haven't found any precedent for, but common sense tells me should be relevant - no evidence provided that the driver left the site. The evidence they've added online is simply an illegible photograph of the signage and three pictures of the car with the charge notice already stuck to it. If the site has CCTV is it very likely they'd go to the trouble of attempting to obtain this evidence?

I understand I should, in addition, inspect the NTK when it arrives and include the appeal point that it's not compliant if I find anything.

So, basically, would you stick to the standard first appeal or go full steam and aim for an early backdown? I'm happy to go with the standard template if it really is the best way but the impression I got was that this is advised to stop people identifying themselves as the driver at first appeal stage - which I certainly would not do whichever route I chose. Also, are the main points I've listed for the POPLA appeal looking sound?

Huge thanks in advance for your input.

catfunt

Well done for doing your research!

I assume you have had a windscreen ticket (what date?) and have yet to recieve a NtK?

With the appeal - play safe and keep it standard.

You could in addition state that "An occupant of the car was indeed shopping on the site, here is a copy of their receipt timed within a few minutes of your ticket being issued" but keep it to that.

As for the POPLA appeal points, I'd make the first point your last, and you'll probably need to explain how your case differs from the Beavis case.. but we can worry about that if/when the time comes.

Underwriter86

Great, thanks. I'll stick to the template with the receipt included and read up on Beavis since there's no harm in getting the POPLA appeal ready now.

It was a windscreen ticket issued on 12th December.

Coupon-mad

common sense tells me should be relevant - no evidence provided that the driver left the site.

Yep, that's always to be used at POPLA stage. UKPC never have evidence. Have a look at their photos by Googling 'UKPC photos' and popping your car reg & PCN number in. You will find there are no such pictures of the driver or anyone else, and in fact you'll find some very useful images of a pale, unreadable sign where the vital details and the £100 charge cannot be read. Ammo for POPLA stage.

Along with the fact that by you appealing now but not naming the driver, UKPC are likely to forget to send any NTK (that's the whole point of timing the appeal now). Happens in maybe 95% of cases, no NTK is sent, just a rejection letter, so the advice is then to delay your POPLA appeal a little, until an appellant is safely past day 56 (too late for the PPC to then send a NTK).

Be very careful that the drop-down menu on UKPC's webpage for appeals says 'registered keeper' before you hit 'submit' because it defaults back to 'driver' every time, if you adjust anything (believe me, I know). And keep a screenshot or two.

Underwriter86

Thanks for the tip, I'll be sure to watch out for that on the website - sneaky!

Another thing worth mentioning, I also complained in writing to the retailer, as advised here, who initially tried to fob me off with a "nothing to do with us" standard response. When I replied, more forcefully, they asked for a copy of my receipt and advised they would ask the landlord to look into the matter. I won't hold out for a result from that, but who knows. And it just goes to show you've got to try more than once sometimes.

Coupon-mad

Yep - you have played this exactly right, all power to you.

Ralph-y

Have you been back to the retail stores to have a nice friendly chat with the manager ?

Ralph:cool:

Underwriter86

UKPC have granted my appeal at the first stage without any fuss.

I believe it may be due to attaching a receipt showing a purchase was made in one of the stores since I appealed only with the standard template.

I'm hugely relieved and would like to thank everybody here who assisted and all the previous posters who've shared experiences. It's been a huge eye opener for me and I will certainly be much more careful in future about where I park.

Underwriter86

Further thoughts. I still feel that the signage in this particular case should be subjected to further scrutiny because the thought that people are being caught out by this and relieved of £80. I've won the appeal, but does anybody think it's worth taking the matter further - there's a link to the signs at the top of the page.

The_Deep

These "driver left site" tickets. How do they know there was not more than one person in the car and only one left the site?


Is telling porkies to PoPLA an offence?

Underwriter86

Exactly! Short of having extensive CCTV evidence I can't see that they could ever provide evidence to prove this. And looking at the signage in this case, the leaving the site point is clearly thrown in the mix as an extra aside for them to try it on.

Are there any examples of leaving the site appeals being lost?