Help needed! Popla rejected appeal, and Premier Park are now demanding £100

christine.pearce25

Forgive me and point me in the right direction if I am on posting on wrong thread, but I Need Help Please!!! Basically, I received a parking notice from Premier Park in Southampton. I have appealed with Popla on grounds of mitigating circumstances = I drove into the car park to check out how to use it for my first day at college. I didn't park, turn engine off or leave car. I suffer extreme anxiety, and needed to take it slow, take pills and gather information on how to pay etc. I have pasted below, a letter I wrote appealing the ticket - I was only in there 17 mins!! and the photos they have are of me entering and leaving, no pics showing me parked up!
Anyway, Popla have refused my appeal, and Premier Parking want me to pay £100 or they will take me to court. I am going to stand my ground on this one. I was too ill to "drive through" and gather the info any quicker, and I think that this decision is going against disability rights. Please any guidance, advice etc through this is really needed and appreciated.


You issued me with a parking ticket on 8th September 2015 but I believe

it was both unfairly and illegally issued:



* The alleged contravention did not occur

Quite simply, the vehicle was not parked inappropriately at the time the ticket was issued. This is due to the fact that I never parked my vehicle or left my vehicle alone stationery in a parking bay or any other area in St Mary's Church car park, as I was only driving though – please see mitigating circumstances.



* Mitigating circumstances

There are mitigating circumstances to explain why I entered and exited your car park and I am requesting that the charge be waived for this reason: I am diagnosed ADHD and suffer with Chronic Anxiety, and take prescribed medication daily for both. I also suffer with Chronic OCD, for which I receive medical help, and I find this condition extremely hard to manage. The reason I drove into St Mary's Church car park, was because I was due to start Southampton City College on Wednesday 9th September, and on the date specified, 2nd September, I was doing a “trial” route to prepare myself for the actual day. This trial route, involved me going into St Marys Church car park, because I planned to park there whilst at college every Wednesday. I entered the car park at 12:15 and quite simply drove around it, to get myself comfortable with how it was set out, how busy it was and what the various protocols were. I also checked to see how much the car park would cost and saw there was an app for my mobile phone that I could download to pay for my parking, Ringo. I downloaded this, and in put the parking location number (9155), so that I was fully prepared for my first day of college. I remember being extremely anxious on the day, because I don't like doing “new” things, especially alone, and had to go “slowly” as my heart was racing. I had to take a beta blocker, which I am

prescribed for occasions like this, and had to wait for this to start working. When my anxiety worsens, so does my OCD. This causes me to check and recheck things, tap and say things aloud repeatedly to myself, and that is why I took 17 minutes (My exit time was 12:32). Please see attached evidence which shows I am in receipt of disability allowance. I also have medical letters/diagnosis, which I am not willing to “go public” with, but am prepared to show a court official if necessary.



* The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable.

The amount you have charged is not based upon any commercially justifiable loss to your company or the landowner.

According to the Unfair Consumer Contract Regulations, parking charges on private land must not exceed the cost to the landowner during the period the motorist is parked there. In my case, the £100 charge you are asking for far exceeds the cost to the landowner of £1.30

Quentin

Now that POPLA appeal has been rejected you can only wait and see if they issue court proceedings. They have 6 years to do so. Ignore everything else that they send including any contact from debt collectors


If they do then that is the time to prepare a defence to put in.

Fruitcake

OK, you are now in the right place to get individual advice, but we still need the timeline of events.


Please also confirm whether the parking company was Premier Park, or Premier Parking Solutions.

hoohoo

You should write to the parking company

Dear Parking Company,
I disagree with the POPLA verdict. The debt is therefore denied and debt collection activities will be a waste of monies on your part.

Both you and POPLA failed to take account of the Equalities Act 2000. A reasonable adjustment would be to allow me a longer grace time to investigate the car park than usual. Additionally, there was clearly no acceptance of any contract by performance.

If you feel otherwise, I suggest we use ADR to attempt to settle the matter, and I propose the Consumer Ombudsman as a suitable body.

The_Deep

I disagree with Hoo Hoo. IMO the OP should have read the notice and paid. his various conditions do nor excuse him from bilking


Popla acted correctly, there was nothing illegal about the PPCs actions, and his mitigation is extremely thin. he did not mention Beavis and his case is different.

OP, your options are limited to paying or not paying. If you choose the latter the PPC can take the matter to court. They have six years to do so. If they take you to court you have two viable options. pay or defend.

You have to ask yourself, are you mentally sufficiently robust to go against a solicitor in court? Can you stand the stress of a six year wait? Can you mount a successful complaint under EA 2010?

From my reading of your posts I would say that you are not/cannot.

christine.pearce25

08/09/15 parking ticket at St Mary's Church, Southampton issued by:
Premier Park Ltd
PO Box 624
Exeter
EX1 9JG

15/09/15 - I wrote the letter to Premier Park Ltd

01/10/15 - Premier Park rejected my letter, and I filed an appeal with POPLA

10/10/15 Premier Park submitted "information and evidence" to POPLA - as follows:
Operator Name: Premier Park
Operator Case: Summary
I enclose copies of the signage at this site. The Appellant has not denied seeing said signage.
The Appellant has provided an explanation as to why she entered the site and we are completely sympathetic to this.
However, it is the responsibility of any motorist to ensure that they have read and parked in compliance with the terms and conditions of the site. On this occasion, the Appellant did not.
The signage clearly states that if you enter or park on this land contravening the terms and conditions, you are agreeing to pay a £100 Parking Charge Notice.
We do allow a grace period but the Appellant was on site for 16 minutes and no payment for parking was made.
We request that the Appellant's appeal be refused.

13/01/16 POPLA assessment and decision
DecisionUnsuccessful
Assessor NameSafoora Sagheer
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the vehicle registered under.... failed to comply with the terms and conditions by parking on site for 16 minutes without purchasing parking time.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that she entered the car park as she was starting college and wanted to read the terms and conditions of the site and to see what the college was like. She states she started to feel unwell and she was not fit to drive so she remained in the vehicle.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator has provided photographs of sufficient clear signage located throughout the car park which clearly states parking tariffs apply. The signage also explains that failure to adhere to the terms and conditions will result in the operator issuing a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to the value of £100. The British Parking Association Code of Practice mentions under section 18.3 “specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the 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”. I note the appellant states she entered the site to see what the college was like, however, this does not detract from the fact it remains the appellant’s responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions by ensuring parking time is purchase for duration of stay. I also note the appellant states she was feeling unwell, however, it is not within my remit to make a decision to overturn a parking charge notice due to mitigating circumstances. As the appellant was on site for duration of 16 minutes without purchasing parking time, she has breached the terms and conditions of the site. As the appellant has failed to adhere with the terms and conditions by failing to purchase parking time, I am satisfied that the PCN issued is valid. Accordingly, I must refuse the appeal.
DecisionUnsuccessful
Assessor NameSafoora Sagheer
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the vehicle registered under ...failed to comply with the terms and conditions by parking on site for 16 minutes without purchasing parking time.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that she entered the car park as she was starting college and wanted to read the terms and conditions of the site and to see what the college was like. She states she started to feel unwell and she was not fit to drive so she remained in the vehicle.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator has provided photographs of sufficient clear signage located throughout the car park which clearly states parking tariffs apply. The signage also explains that failure to adhere to the terms and conditions will result in the operator issuing a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to the value of £100. The British Parking Association Code of Practice mentions under section 18.3 “specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the 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”. I note the appellant states she entered the site to see what the college was like, however, this does not detract from the fact it remains the appellant’s responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions by ensuring parking time is purchase for duration of stay. I also note the appellant states she was feeling unwell, however, it is not within my remit to make a decision to overturn a parking charge notice due to mitigating circumstances. As the appellant was on site for duration of 16 minutes without purchasing parking time, she has breached the terms and conditions of the site. As the appellant has failed to adhere with the terms and conditions by failing to purchase parking time, I am satisfied that the PCN issued is valid. Accordingly, I must refuse the appeal.

15/01/16/B] Letter received from Premier Park, requesting settlement of PCN with payment of £100 by 29th January 2016, otherwise they will commence court action to recover what I owe.


I was 1 minute over the courtesy time. I was not starting college that day, and was at the car park to read the rules and check the car park out, not the college. "the appellant’s responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions" - I was reading the rules and regulations when my anxiety kicked in, that's why I was there. I wouldn't have fully understood them, until my medication kicked in and my anxiety subsided - how could I comply with terms and conditions, that I was unable to read within the 15 mins, due to my disability and coinciding conditions.
Do you think they will persue this to court?

Redx

nobody can tell you if a PPC will go to court in the next 6 years, just like nobody can tell you next weeks lorttery results in advance of the draw

but a judge may side with you and your circumstances if it ever went that far, popla is not binding upon you (shame you didnt come here for advice before submitting the popla appeal) , especially if using the BPA CoP and the EA2010

YOU CAN TRY TO GET THE LANDOWNER TO CANCEL IT, THIS IS THE BEST SOLUTION

meanwhile, you should remove all identifying personal details from the last post, especially your VRN

learn from this one about GRACE PERIODS and the EA2010 and court cases

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5394550

christine.pearce25

thank you. i think i have removed any personal info now. I will put a letter together to send to Premier Park, following the advice given and also the "grace period". Should I also mention, camera's may not have been calibrated properly?? ...

hoohoo

I wouldn't bother about the calibration unless the issue was only a few seconds, or you disagree with the time.

I would stick with the main points which was that you never parked; this was a fact finding mission; normally a parking company will allow a 10 minute grace period for this; however your particular OCD status means you need longer; a reasonable adjustment via the Equalities Act 2010 is to allow you longer.

Guys_Dad

Presumably, as you took down the Ringo details and intended to use the car park when starting college, you will have proof of your intent with the various payments that you have made via ringo for the use of the car park following your trial run?

If so, then that should be part of your appeal to landowner or defence should it get to court.

If not, then what alternative parking arrangements did you make?

christine.pearce25

yes, i have history on the ringo app, that I installed of me then parking at this car park for college