UKPC 2nd letter stage

naiomi1908

Hi i need a little help I've recently tried to renew my bank loan to be informed I have a ccj when looking into this it's from UK parking company I've never received any letter or anything stating anything about this I moved house last year I've rang the company and they said they sent letters to my old address but if I haven't received them and have proof of paying for parking the date they said which was August last year and luckily you have to pay over the phone with a bank card how can I now remove this ccj as it's affecting my credit limit and the company are saying it's nothing to do with them now and has been passed on. How can they get away with it when they have clearly stated they send letters to my old address also the letters they sent were in January this year the date of parking was August last year I'm just so confused of what I do now please help

Coupon-mad

naiomi1908 wrote: »

Hi i need a little help I've recently tried to renew my bank loan to be informed I have a ccj when looking into this it's from UK parking company.

I've never received any letter or anything stating anything about this I moved house last year I've rang the company and they said they sent letters to my old address but if I haven't received them and have proof of paying for parking the date they said which was August last year and luckily you have to pay over the phone with a bank card.

how can I now remove this ccj as it's affecting my credit limit and the company are saying it's nothing to do with them now and has been passed on.

How can they get away with it when they have clearly stated they send letters to my old address also the letters they sent were in January this year the date of parking was August last year I'm just so confused of what I do now please help

Read these threads:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5524075

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5524754

You need to start your own thread, using the 'NEW THREAD' BUTTON on page one of this forum board so hop back there using 'forum jump' or the breadcrumb trail at the very top of this page (blue tiny writing).

If you don't know how, go back to your welcome email and read it/watch the 'new to the forum?' video tutorial.

hineyb

Ok Thanks so in regards to contacting UKPC

Shall i say about the 605 response..

605 - i receive letter back from standard appeal saying.. in order to make final desicion.. please can you send a copt of vaild parking permit to appeals dept...

so now if i do this they will cancel 605??

do you think there is grounds for me here to say

"here is my parking permit.. can you now please council all of the above fines in my name due to your wardens poor awareness"... and send all the PCN numbers i have???

Coupon-mad

so now if i do this they will cancel 605??

No they won't cancel - but you can send your permit as long as you do not say who was driving (unless you've already accidentally told them)...

hineyb

Hey Coup

nope i havent told them im the driver..

this is the letter received back from landlord...

There is an appeal process as part of the current scheme. If your tenants wish to appeal against a specific parking fine then they can email me with the parking fine reference and reasons why they consider the fine was issued incorrectly. The appeals are not decided on by me but by the Residents Association directors. I have to say that as the scheme has been in operation for 4 years it is unlikely that an appeal would be supported because someone parked in a Zone without a valid Zone permit



As I mentioned in my first email to you parking is a major problem because there are not enough spaces for the people seeking to park.



If there is not a Zone 1 space available when your tenant arrives home then the alternative is to park in the adopted spine road on the development or (as some residents have been forced to) park in one of the side roads on the other side of Belswains Lane



I do appreciate that this is not ideal situation but the directors of the Residents Association believe that it is better to have a parking scheme in place rather than no scheme

so once they got my permit as proof.. then what are they going to do???

Coupon-mad

Reject the appeal & issue a POPLA code.

hineyb

so ive checked a few POPLA appeals and i have come up with this as mine...

anything i should add or take out??

I am the registered keeper and I wish to appeal a recent parking charge from UKPC on 19/07/2016 06:08 at Apsley Lock. I submit the points below to show that I am not liable for the parking charge:

1) No standing or authority to pursue charges nor form contracts with drivers.
2) The signage was not readable so there was no valid contract formed.
3) No contract agreed and no legitimate interest nor clear signs.

1) No standing or authority to pursue charges nor form contracts with drivers.

I believe that this Operator has no proprietary interest in the land, so they have no standing to make contracts with drivers in their own right, nor to pursue charges for breach in their own name. In the absence of such title, UKPCmust have assignment of rights from the landowner to pursue charges for breach in their own right, including at court level. A commercial site agent for the true landholder has no automatic standing nor authority in their own right, which would meet the strict requirements of section 7 of the BPA Code of Practice.

Section 7 of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice requires parking operators to have the written authority from the landowner to operate on the land and to enforce charges in the courts in their own name.!

In addition, Section 7.3 states:

“The written authorisation must also set out:!

a. the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined!

b. any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation

c. any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement!

d. who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs!

e. the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.''

I therefore put UKPC to strict proof to provide POPLA and myself with an unredacted, contemporaneous copy of the contract between UKPC and the landowner, not another agent or retailer or other non-landholder, because it will still not be clear that the landowner has authorised the necessary rights to UKPC.!

2) The signage was not compliant so there was no valid contract formed between UKPC and the driver.

Unreadable signage breaches Appendix B of the BPA Code of Practice which states that terms on entrance signs must be clearly readable without a driver having to turn away from the road ahead. A Notice is not imported into the contract unless brought home so prominently that the party 'must' have known of it and agreed terms beforehand. Nothing about this Operator's onerous inflated 'parking charges' was sufficiently prominent and it is clear that the requirements for forming a contract (i.e. consideration flowing between the two parties, offer, acceptance and fairness and transparency of terms offered in good faith) were not satisfied.

Section 18 of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice requires operators to fully comply with the following on entrance signage:

18.2 Entrance signs play an important part in establishing a parking contract and deterring trespassers. Therefore, as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. Entrance signs must tell drivers that the car park is managed and that there are terms and conditions they must be aware of. Entrance signs must follow some minimum general principles and be in a standard format. The size of the sign must take into account the expected speed of vehicles approaching the car park, and it is recommended that you follow Department for Transport guidance on this. See Appendix B for an example of an entrance sign and more information about their use.

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. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm.

18.4 If you intend to use the keeper liability provisions in Schedule 4 of POFA 2012, your signs must give ’adequate notice’. This includes:
• specifying the sum payable for unauthorised parking
• adequately bringing the charges to the attention of drivers, and
• following any applicable government signage regulations.

18.10 So that disabled motorists can decide whether they want to use the site, there should be at least one sign containing the terms and conditions for parking that can be viewed without needing to leave the vehicle. Ideally this sign should be close to any parking bays set aside for disabled motorists.

UKPC’s reason for issuing the parking charge was, “Parking in a permit area without displaying a valid permit”. As per Appendix B, “There must be at least one item from Group 1. In this instance, that would apply to text mentioning “Permit holders only”

Also as per Appendix B, “Signs should be readable and understandable at all times, including during the hours of darkness or at dusk if and when parking enforcement activity takes place at those times.” Contrary to this, you can see from UKPC photographic evidence, their signage text is far to small for any one with good eyesight to read, not to mention the fact they are not well lit at night making this impossible to see.

If a driver can't read the sum of the parking charge (£100) nor the terms before parking - because the font is too small/the sign unremarkable and too high to read from a driver's seat - then they cannot have agreed to it. Also, a keeper appellant cannot be bound by inadequate notice of the charge either (POFA Schedule 4 requires 'adequate notice' of the sum of the parking charge, not just vague illegible small print, however near the car).

The well-known and often used 'Red Hand Rule' in the binding case of J Spurling Ltd v Bradshaw [1956] applies, where Denning LJ stated: ''Some clauses which I have seen would need to be printed in red ink...with a red hand pointing to it before the notice could be held to be sufficient''. In Mendelson v Normand and Thornton v Shoe Lane which were both about parking, this was also clearly stated by Denning LJ:

‘The customer is bound by those terms as long as they are sufficiently brought to his notice beforehand, but not otherwise. In {ticket cases of former times} the issue…was regarded as an offer by the company. That theory was, of course, a fiction. No customer in a thousand ever read the conditions. In order to give sufficient notice, it would need to be printed in red ink with a red hand pointing to it – or something equally startling.’!

i.e. even if a document or notice is ostensibly under the nose of a consumer, the onerous term (e.g. £100 charge for not displaying a valid ticket in a car park) needs to be VERY explicit and prominent. Not hidden among small print on a sign, regardless of whether that sign is in the vicinity of the car. This was reiterated by Denning LJ in Thornton v Shoe Lane Parking [1971] where he held that the courts should not hold any man bound by such a condition unless it was ''drawn to his attention in the most explicit way''. Small print on an illegible, unremarkable and pale sign on a wall is not enough and is not on a par with the very clear signs 'with the charge in large lettering' as was explored and vital to the decision in Parking Eye v Beavis.!

The signs are up on poles, higher than normal line-of-sight nor do they communicate full contractual terms & conditions visible to the occupants of the car. Any upright signs were not so prominent among all the other signage on site that they were ever seen by the occupants of the car. Any photos supplied by UKPC to POPLA will show the signs with the misleading aid of a close up camera and the angle may well not show how high the sign is. As such, I require UKPC to state the height of each sign in their response and to show contemporaneous photo evidence of these signs, taken at the same time of day without photo shopping, cropping or lighting aids (including lighting adjustments made by camera or software) and showing where the signs are placed.

3) No contract agreed and no legitimate interest nor clear signs.

I also wish to reference the Aziz test (as my case is different to that of Beavis v Parking Eye) in order to assess whether the imbalance arises ‘contrary to the requirement of good faith’, it must be determined whether the seller or supplier, dealing fairly and equitably with the consumer, could reasonably assume that the consumer would have agreed to the term concerned in individual contract negotiations.”!

And as for whether average consumers 'would have agreed' to pay £100 had there been negotiations in advance, the answer here is obviously no. There is no justification or negotiation that could have possibly have persuaded an average consumer to pay £100 to this parking firm. Their charge relies upon unseen terms, not clear contracts, and should not be upheld.

I have made my detailed submission to show how the applicable law (POFA) supports my appeal, which I submit should now be determined in my favour.

This concludes my POPLA appeal.

Yours faithfully,

hineyb

ok i am going to send the above

i have just go on to poplas page

what grounds am i submitting it on?

would it be 'I was not improperly parked' ?? or is this admitting to being the driver?? or does this not matter at POPLA stage?

The_Deep

I am surprised that you need to ask these questions, have you not understood what you have written in your previous post?

hineyb

i guess you are refferring to this part of my letter?

'I am the registered keeper and I wish to appeal a recent parking charge from UKPC on 19/07/2016 06:08 at Apsley Lock. I submit the points below to show that I am not liable for the parking charge'

so what am i appealing under

my vehicle was stolen - no
i was not improperly parked? - ??
the amount requested on the pcn is not correct - no
i was not the driver or registered keeper of the vehicle at the time? - ??
or other? but on other it says appeals based solely on the following grounds are less likely to be successful ?

Please excuse any ignorance.. this is my first time appealing with POPLA!! i do apologise!