APCOA Birmingham Airport

bobo0742

A car registered to my wife was photographed parked at Birmingham airport on 20/10/16. The photographs span a time of four minutes, but clearly show the vehicle parked in what appears to be a lay-by, and outside of the double (presumably red) lines.
We received an "reminder" from APCOA on around 25th Nov 2016 (this was the first letter we received), at which point I sent them an email asking them why we had got a reminder for something we had not initially been notified about. I also requested further information about the incident, asking them for pictures of their signage and any further photo's that may assist with who was driving. My wife was not driving and I suspect from their lack of further evidence that they do not have photographic evidence of who was
A couple of days later I received what I can only presume was the original notice, which was dated 7th November 2016...dated some 18 days after the alleged incident. Having read numerous threads I am of the belief that the time scales are irrelevant in this instant, but would appreciate some clarification...No mention of POFA 2012 in either letter.
We have received the standard response from APCOA stating our appeal has been unsuccessful, and the same photographs but in colour. There is also one extra picture of a road sign, that appears to have actually been taken of a road sign in a building!!!
I have my POPLA code, which I intend to appeal too, but would appreciate some guidance on which template to base the appeal on please.
The POPLA code came to us on about 10th December 2016, so I really need to get this sorted now...many thanks in anticipation

Quentin

There is a "near" POPLA appeal template in the Newbies FAQ thread.


You need to build your own (search here for 'APCOA POPLA Airport' for recent appeals) then put it up here for comment/advice

Umkomaas

I have my POPLA code, which I intend to appeal too, but would appreciate some guidance on which template to base the appeal on please.

Your starting point is post #3 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky where there are some relevant links as well as some model appeal paragraphs for copying and pasting.

Polite request - please use some paragraphing in any future posts, as walls of text (as per your first post) causes many regulars to ignore and move on, because of the difficulty in reading such a block of words.

Fruitcake

Byelaws and non POFA 2012 compliant NTK will feature prominently in your PoPLA appeal. The dates are very relevant as when using cameras and no notice to driver is given, the PPC has to get the NTK to the keeper no later than 14 days; the date of the alleged event being day zero.

Since there is no mention of the POFA, the scammers obviously know they do not meet the strict requirements of the POFA and cannot therefore transfer liability to the keeper. Only the driver is liable on relevant land in that case, but where Byelaws apply, only the vehicle owner can be held liable, and only for trespass, and only by the landowner, and only within six months.

bobo0742

Noted re the spacing of paragraphs....

Being computer illiterate what do you mean by "post #3 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky"

Many Thanks

Fruitcake

bobo0742 wrote: »

Noted re the spacing of paragraphs....

Being computer illiterate what do you mean by "post #3 of the NEWBIES FAQ sticky"

Many Thanks

The Sticky thread for NEWBIES is at the top of the page where you started this thread. It is the best and most comprehensive source of information you will find anywhere.

Post 3 has a number of template PoPLA appeal points. You should pick each of the points that are applicable incuding at least,

Not the landowner,
Non POFA 2012 compliant NTK,
No standing to issue charges,
Inadequate signage,
Not relevant land because Byelaws apply.

bobo0742

Fruitcake

Does this mean my wife she base her appeal to POPLA on the following facts

1 She was NOT the driver

2 The land concerned is relevant land

3 No notification was received from APCOA within the 14 days required for POFA (which has not been mentioned in any event), and therefore the registered keeper is not liable.

Is it as simple as that??

Redx

use one of the recent BHX APCOA airport appeals for her to form her own POPLA appeal

as long as the driver was not revealed its fairly straightforward

it is NOT RELEVANT LAND , as BYELAWS APPLY , so head the appeal up by mentioning this is a BYELAWS CASE

then go through all the issues like POFA2012 not applicable , keeper not liable , byelaws applying , poor signage that fails the BPA CoP , grace periods etc

there was a recent one this month where apcoa dropped the case when they read that appeal, base hers on that one if you can, (search this forum for it)

as for your question , the sticky thread is near the top of this forum above your thread, post #1 tells you how to appeal, post #3 of that thread tells people how to sort out a popla appeal

please do some research and base her appeal on similar RECENT 2016 appeals for the same site

POPLA have all byelaws cases on hold , pending a legality decision , but the appeal MUST still be placed before the expiry deadline of 28 days from the date of the code (up to 33 but dont push it , dont miss the deadline)

bobo0742

This is my intended appeal to PoPLA

My wife is the registered keeper of vehicle ********* and am appealing a parking charge from APCOA.

1. The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA 2012 – no keeper liability.
2. No standing or authority to pursue charges nor form contracts with drivers

1. The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA 2012 – no keeper liability.

To date I have not been issued a Notice to Keeper (NTK) by APCOA. As a notice to driver was provided on the vehicle, an NTK is required to be issued no sooner than 28 days after, or no later than 56 days after the service of that notice. This stipulation is laid out in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA).

The alleged infringement occurred on **/**/2016 and from my understanding the NTK was required to reach me by **/**/2016. As none of the mandatory information set out by Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA has been made available to me as Registered Keeper the conditions set out by paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Therefore, there can be no keeper liability. The first correspondence received from ACPOA was dated **/**/2016 which was a “reminder”. We contacted them asking why the first correspondence was a “reminder”, and then a couple of days later we received a further notice dated **/**/2016 which was notification of the original PCN. If we assume the original was “mislaid” in the post, however it still falls outside of the 14-day requirement for PoFA, and more than 56 days have elapsed since the “date” of the original PCN, and in any event APCOA have not mentioned PoFA 2012 in any correspondence.

The keeper liability requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 must be complied with, where the appellant is the registered keeper, as in this case. One of these requirements is the issue of a NTK compliant with certain provisions. This operator failed to serve an NTK that specified the requirements of PoFA 2012. As there has been no admission as to who may have parked the car and no evidence of this person has been produced by the operator, despite requests from ourselves, it has been held by POPLA multiple times in 2016 that a parking charge with no PoFA backed NTK cannot be enforced against the registered keeper.

2. 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, APCOA must 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. I therefore put APCOA to strict proof to provide POPLA and ourselves with an un-redacted, contemporaneous copy of the contract between APCOA and the landowner, not just another agent or retailer or other non-landholder, because it will still not be clear that the landowner has authorised the necessary rights to APCOA.

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. Section 7.1 states:

“If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you the authority to carry out all the aspects of car park management for the site that you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges”.

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 do not believe that this operator's mere site agreement as a contractor issuing PCNs and letters 'on behalf of' a landowner gives the parking firm any rights to sue in their own name. This is insufficient to comply with the BPA Code of Practice and not enough to hold me liable in law to pay APCOA. APCOA have no standing to enforce 'parking charges' or penalties of any description in any court.

I put APCOA to strict proof of compliance with all of the above requirements.
3. Vehicle not illegally parked?
The images provided to us by ACPOA do not fully reveal where the vehicle is stationary. However, it does show that the vehicle is not parked on the double lines, which from the images provided could be red, or even be yellow. In fact, the vehicle s photographed is well in front of the double lines, in what appears to be a lay-by.

INSERT PHOTO OF PHOTOGRAPH OF CAR PARKED OUTSIDE OF DOUBLE LINES

4. Signage
As we are not familiar with Birmingham airport, it was requested of APCOA of evidence of their signage and where it was located. They sent us one photograph of a sign, which I have attached, which appears to be of a sign inside a building! How is a motorist meant to read this?

INSERT PHOTOGRAPH OF SIGN DISPLAYED IN A BUILDING

Is this a suitable letter of appeal?

Redx

no , the KEEPER has to do the appeal, so do it as if you are her and word it accordingly , even if you end up uploading it to popla as a pdf

ie:- YOU did not get the letters or the code , SHE DID , so SHE should do the appeal, even if YOU are writing it on her behalf (its nothing to do with you apart from you are doing the donkey work)

also I doubt that a windscreen pcn was affixed to the vehicle , so did you copy and paste that appeal without reading it ?

an NTK comes in the post , which is their usual method of doing this , but if this did not happen and only the "reminder" was sent then yes mention that no NTK was received by the KEEPER , bearing in mind POFA2012 does not apply anyway to airports as they are NOT relevant land

and you did not do as I said and head up the appeal as a BYELAWS CASE

please read what people are telling you , then DRAFT an appeal by copying the recent winner into NOTEPAD and amend it to ensure no LIES are told , that it is honest and truthful but does not indicate who was driving (mention THE DRIVER , THE KEEPER , not "ME or I or MY WIFE etc)

adapt the recent BHX APCOA POPLA appeal by Button_Moon to suit this particular appeal , and the Travel4Life appeal from a few months ago too

both were dropped by apcoa after they read them

stop rushing and do this properly

please

bobo0742

Once again, thank you

...and noted about not mentioning the words wife or me...and heading it as a BYELAWS case

The timeline of events was that, the incident was 20th October 2016, the "reminder" was dated 23/11/2016 and received 25/11/2016, the actual parking charge notice which was dated 07/11/2016 was received after the "reminder" on 08/12/2016 (well after the reminder).

Nothing was attached to the windscreen.

Due to my inexperience with computers and threads, I am not able to find the "recent winners" incident....is there a link someone can send me please.

I really appreciate all the help...just slightly confused