Railway Byelaw Indigo

clint_S

I've just received the Indigo response to my POPLA appeal and the evidence is of an Indigo sign but not the one at Hartford station. It is clearly a different sign. Do I email the advisor and point this out, also they have failed to address most of my points and the sign show it to be a penalty notice not a Parking charge notice as they claim.


They have also place a screen shot of something with are you the drive and yes next to it, since I didn't complete anything online this must have been filled in by Indigo.

bod1467

You need to send a rebuttal to POPLA to dismantle the PPC's evidence. Search this forum for POPLA rebuttal for examples.

clint_S

Thinking of replying with something along the lines of:

I have recently received the evidence provided by Indigo. I would like to draw your attention to certain areas on which I feel are important.

• The Photographic evidence of the signs provided by Indigo are not the signs at Hartford station, as is clearly shown if you compare the photographs of Hartford station car park I provided against the photographs provided by Indigo of somewhere else.

This is extremely important point as the signage at Hartford station is not compliant with the BPA Code of Practice and was not seen before parking - so there was no valid contract formed between Indigo and the driver.

• The evidence provided by Indigo show that the carpark is controlled by Railway Byelaws and a Penalty notice was issued. Since this is a penalty notice issued for breach of Railway Byelaw no person or body other than the courts can impose a penalty for breach of Bye-laws

• Indigo have not shown any evidence of a breach of the Railway Byelaws.

• Indigo have failed to provide any evidence that they have the written authority from the landowner to operate on the land as is required in Section 7 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice.
• The original appeal to Indigo was a letter sent via recorded delivery. I am merely the day to day keeper of the car, neither established as the driver nor am I the registered keeper or owner. It is for Indigo to purse either the driver for Parking Charge Notice or the owner for a Penalty notice.
• Indigo failed to serve any NTK at all. As there has been no admission as to who may have parked the car and no evidence of this person has been produced by Indigo, it has been held by POPLA multiple times in 2015 that a parking charge with no NTK cannot be enforced against the registered keeper.
• Indigo have failed to establish keeper liability.
  
  

To summarize Indigo have failed to show that any contract was established, Indigo have failed to show a breach of the Railway Byelaw, Indigo have failed to provide authority from the landowner to operate, Indigo have failed to establish Keeper Liability, Indigo have failed to provided signage for Hartford Station, Indigo have failed to provide a NTK, and Indigo have failed to show that signage is compliant with the BPA code of Practice.

I therefore respectfully request that my appeal is upheld and the charge is dismissed

Coupon-mad

clint_S wrote: »

I've just received the Indigo response to my POPLA appeal and the evidence is of an Indigo sign but not the one at Hartford station. It is clearly a different sign. Do I email the advisor and point this out, also they have failed to address most of my points and the sign show it to be a penalty notice not a Parking charge notice as they claim.

They have also place a screen shot of something with ''are you the driver'' and ''yes'' next to it, since I didn't complete anything online this must have been filled in by Indigo.

Wow, you are saying they appear to have falsified evidence?!

So you need to see if the Portal is still open for comments and submit a few bullet points now, today. I would suggest the version below.

If the POPLA Portal is not open for comments, email them to POPLA and tell them that you only just got the evidence pack and the Portal isn't letting to add comments, so here they are:



My comments on the Indigo evidence pack re POPLA code xxxxxxxxxx:

- Indigo have failed to show that the individual (me) that they are pursuing for this penalty charge is actually the party potentially liable under Railway Byelaws. Neither the driver nor the owner have been identified at any point.

- I appealed as the registered keeper and as such, I cannot be held liable under any applicable law or byelaw. My appeals covers this vital issue of 'no keeper liability' and Indigo have failed to show any evidence of the identity of the owner (the only party the byelaws say can be liable for a penalty).

- Indigo have failed to show any images of any PCN or NTK and the letters call the charge a 'penalty' in some places but a 'parking charge' in other places. It cannot be both a penalty issued under byelaws and a contract law 'parking charge'; this makes it impossible to glean the intention behind the charge, the liability or any 'commercial justification' or legitimate interest in issuing it. Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, the key terms of a contract must be transparent. The nature of this 'charge/penalty' is as clear as mud, especially as a private parking firm has no standing to enforce a penalty in Magistrates Court anyway.

- The evidence pack includes a 'stock' example of an Indigo sign but not the one at Hartford station! It is clearly a different sign so cannot possibly evidence what was there on the day.

- Indigo have also placed in the evidence pack, a screen-shot of something which asks: ''are you the driver'' and ''yes'' is shown next to it! I wish POPLA to raise this with the BPA as very serious breach of the Code of Practice. It appears to me to be falsified 'evidence', since I didn't complete anything online! I appealed by letter and at no point did I click on any boxes online - and the driver WAS NOT identified - so this wholly misleading piece of information must have been concocted by Indigo. I find that extremely alarming and trust POPLA will share my feeling that this is a matter that needs reporting to the BPA under POPLA's power to do so.

This concludes my final comments on the evidence.

clint_S

Thanks Everyone

Decision Successful

bod1467

Well done.

As said on the POPLA Decisions thread ... why are POPLA even considering Byelaws cases? They have no authority for them, as Byelaws claims can only be enforced in the Magistrates court.