We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
JAS Parking Solutions
Mr_Mash
Posts: 18 Forumite
A few days ago I recieved the following email in response to my appeal against a ticket in Staples car park Luton in 2014. As I had cited Beavis I was put in the long list of held cases until it was settled. Now Wright & Hassell have made a decision and rejected my appeal however JAS Parking Solutions website is down and I cannot find a contact number for them to arrange payment of the fine.
According to a previous thread they have been suspended by the BPA, does anyone have any information on this at all? Or any help?
Many thanks
(Below is the repsonse from W&H with the rejection)
POPLA
01 August 2016
Sent by email to the Car Park Operator
Dear Sir/Madam
Car Park Operator J.A.S. Parking Solutions Ltd also t/as J.A.S. Parking Solutions
Appeal Verification Code (“the Appeal”) 3160545005
Wright Hassall Reference POPLA Appeal Outcome Rejected :eek:
We have been appointed by the British Parking Association (“BPA”) to act as an independent appeals body, under the brand of Parking on Private Land Appeals (“POPLA”), in respect of the Appeal and to consider both the Appellants and the Car Park Operator’s positions before providing a decision to the parties. We are not instructed to act on behalf of either party.
We confirm that we have considered the appeal, taking into account all of the evidence at hand and applying the prevailing legislation and with reference to the BPA Code of Practice, and have decided to reject the Appeal on this occasion. To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to the Car Park Operator in the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) will not be cancelled.
Reasons for dismissing the Appeal
• The Appellant stated in the Appeal that the amount of the parking charge is unreasonable. Pursuant to the guidance set out in the Supreme Court’s decision in ParkingEye v Beavis and in accordance with the BPA Code of Practice, a reasonable charge would be £100.00. As the charge the Car Park Operator has imposed is equal to or less than £100.00, we have no option but to reject the Appeal.
• The Appellant has stated in the Appeal that the signage at the car park is not adequate and that they were unaware that they had entered into a contract by remaining at the location. Upon reviewing the evidence provided by both parties we contend that the signage is adequate and does comply with the BPA Code of Practice. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.
• The Appellant has requested evidence that the Car Park Operator has a legal right to manage the site. We are in receipt of sufficient evidence from the Car Park Operator to satisfy us that the Car Park Operator does have a legal right to manage parking at this location and to issue Parking Charge Notices. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.
To the Appellant
To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to the Car Park Operator in the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice will not be cancelled.
To the Car Park Operator
As the Appeal has been rejected, you must allow the Appellant 28 days to make payment. If payment is not forthcoming, you may take further action to recover the PCN.
This is the final decision in this Appeal. We are not able to respond to any future correspondence from either party, nor are we able to provide any information to either party over the telephone.
Yours faithfully
WRIGHT HASSALL LLP
On behalf of Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA)
PS.
Did appeal to POPLA that I hadn't recieved an evidence pack which they replied with citing it was too late to change the outcome.
According to a previous thread they have been suspended by the BPA, does anyone have any information on this at all? Or any help?
Many thanks
(Below is the repsonse from W&H with the rejection)
POPLA
01 August 2016
Sent by email to the Car Park Operator
Dear Sir/Madam
Car Park Operator J.A.S. Parking Solutions Ltd also t/as J.A.S. Parking Solutions
Appeal Verification Code (“the Appeal”) 3160545005
Wright Hassall Reference POPLA Appeal Outcome Rejected :eek:
We have been appointed by the British Parking Association (“BPA”) to act as an independent appeals body, under the brand of Parking on Private Land Appeals (“POPLA”), in respect of the Appeal and to consider both the Appellants and the Car Park Operator’s positions before providing a decision to the parties. We are not instructed to act on behalf of either party.
We confirm that we have considered the appeal, taking into account all of the evidence at hand and applying the prevailing legislation and with reference to the BPA Code of Practice, and have decided to reject the Appeal on this occasion. To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to the Car Park Operator in the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) will not be cancelled.
Reasons for dismissing the Appeal
• The Appellant stated in the Appeal that the amount of the parking charge is unreasonable. Pursuant to the guidance set out in the Supreme Court’s decision in ParkingEye v Beavis and in accordance with the BPA Code of Practice, a reasonable charge would be £100.00. As the charge the Car Park Operator has imposed is equal to or less than £100.00, we have no option but to reject the Appeal.
• The Appellant has stated in the Appeal that the signage at the car park is not adequate and that they were unaware that they had entered into a contract by remaining at the location. Upon reviewing the evidence provided by both parties we contend that the signage is adequate and does comply with the BPA Code of Practice. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.
• The Appellant has requested evidence that the Car Park Operator has a legal right to manage the site. We are in receipt of sufficient evidence from the Car Park Operator to satisfy us that the Car Park Operator does have a legal right to manage parking at this location and to issue Parking Charge Notices. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.
To the Appellant
To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to the Car Park Operator in the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice will not be cancelled.
To the Car Park Operator
As the Appeal has been rejected, you must allow the Appellant 28 days to make payment. If payment is not forthcoming, you may take further action to recover the PCN.
This is the final decision in this Appeal. We are not able to respond to any future correspondence from either party, nor are we able to provide any information to either party over the telephone.
Yours faithfully
WRIGHT HASSALL LLP
On behalf of Parking on Private Land Appeals (POPLA)
PS.
Did appeal to POPLA that I hadn't recieved an evidence pack which they replied with citing it was too late to change the outcome.
0
Comments
-
It is not a fine.
There is no requirement for you to pay anyone anything. Nobody here will suggest that you do pay.
Never, ever ring a private parking company.I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.
All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
where you informed that WH was handling your case , and given the chance to add further comments?Save a Rachael
buy a share in crapita0 -
JAS appear to be in trouble with Companies House.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07602707/filing-history
A notice of compulsory strike off, what have they been up to.You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0 -
your link is dead , however , they are about to be struck off at companies house https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/07602707Save a Rachael
buy a share in crapita0 -
and his debt collection side (DARA DEBT RECOVERY LIMITED) is in the same boat https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08737750/filing-historySave a Rachael
buy a share in crapita0 -
your link is dead
Works fine for me.You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0 -
your original link was about 200 charectors long , and had links via (if I remember correctly) "amazon news "Save a Rachael
buy a share in crapita0 -
You are correct. However, That link was removed several minutes before you posted, do try to keep up.
To OP, why nor write to WH informing them that they may nor be paid by their client.You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0 -
-
No, I edited at 6.03, 2 minutes before your post.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_holes
BTW, their website is not respondingYou never know how far you can go until you go too far.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards