POPLA Appeal Rejected

polar-bear

I received a PCN from Parking Eye on the grounds that a car registered in my name was parked in an Aldi store car park. This particular Aldi store (Blaby, Leicestershire) allows free parking for customers for a period of up to one and a half hours. You have to enter your registration number after shopping, on one of the vdu screens placed near the checkout counters.
I am the registered keeper of this vehicle, but effectively my wife owns and drives it.
We managed to find a receipt proving that my wife had indeed been shopping in the store at the time of the alleged offence, so I thought we had a fairly strong case in appealing against the charge. How wrong can you be!
Because I thought the case was so strong I didn't check for online help and just went ahead with the appeal. As it turns out unsurprisingly, Parking Eye rejected the appeal as "the evidence did not meet the discretionary criteria set by the landowner".
Still thinking I had a good case I appealed to POPLA, but this too was rejected.
I am therefore very unhappy and need advice as to what to do next. In my view there has been no loss to Aldi since my wife had indeed shopped in the store, so this charge is then a penalty for (allegedly) failing to enter her details correctly.

Here is a copy of the POPLA notification:
POPLA assessment and decision
13/01/2017
Verification Code

6063496352

DecisionUnsuccessful
Assessor NameGeorgina Riley
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the appellant’s vehicle parked at ALDI Blaby car park where the operator issued parking charge notice for remaining at the car park for longer than was made permitted.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that his wife parked at the store and entered the vehicle details. he says either the console was faulty or his wife made a mistake

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator has provided photographic evidence if the appellant’s vehicle entering the site at 11:07 and departing at 12:19 on 7 October 2016, as such the vehicle was at the site for one hour 12 minutes. The operator has also provided a copy of the whitelist look up, which provides the vehicle registration numbers for vehicles registered at the car park on that day. This demonstrates that the vehicle was not registered to park at the site on this day. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place at the site showing the terms and conditions in force. The terms and conditions state, “All Customers must enter their vehicle registration to qualify for 1 ½ hours free parking. See in store for details” and “Failure to comply with this will result in a Parking Charge of: £70”. The appellant states that his wife parked the vehicle at the store, he says that the vehicle details need to be entered into a screen within the store. He says that wither the screen did not record the vehicle details or his wife made a mistake. The appellant has provided a receipt to validate the parking period. I acknowledge the appellant’s statement and evidence. However, the terms and conditions are displayed throughout the site and it is reasonable to accept that the driver had the opportunity to review these before parking. Furthermore, it is the motorist’s responsibility to check the terms and conditions of a site before parking. By parking at the site, the driver has agreed to the terms and conditions and agreed to pay the parking charge notice if she does not comply with them. Consequently, by failing to enter her full, correct VRN as required in the sites terms and conditions the appellant has not complied with the sites terms and conditions. Additionally, it is the appellant’s responsibility to ensure she complies with the sites terms and conditions. Finally, while I understand that the appellant’s wife was shopping in store, by failing to register the vehicle at the site she has contravened the terms of parking. In conclusion, the operator has demonstrated to my satisfaction that the appellant has not complied with the sites terms and conditions. Therefore, I determine that the operator issued the parking charge notice correctly.

Coupon-mad

POPLA assessment and decision
13/01/2017
Verification Code

6063496352

DecisionUnsuccessful
Assessor Name xxxx
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the appellant’s vehicle parked at ALDI Blaby car park where the operator issued parking charge notice for remaining at the car park for longer than was made permitted.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that his wife parked at the store and entered the vehicle details. he says either the console was faulty or his wife made a mistake

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The operator has provided photographic evidence if the appellant’s vehicle entering the site at 11:07 and departing at 12:19 on 7 October 2016, as such the vehicle was at the site for one hour 12 minutes.

The operator has also provided a copy of the whitelist look up, which provides the vehicle registration numbers for vehicles registered at the car park on that day. This demonstrates that the vehicle was not registered to park at the site on this day.

The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place at the site showing the terms and conditions in force. The terms and conditions state, “All Customers must enter their vehicle registration to qualify for 1 ½ hours free parking. See in store for details” and “Failure to comply with this will result in a Parking Charge of: £70”.

The appellant states that his wife parked the vehicle at the store, he says that the vehicle details need to be entered into a screen within the store. He says that either the screen did not record the vehicle details or his wife made a mistake.

The appellant has provided a receipt to validate the parking period. I acknowledge the appellant’s statement and evidence.

However, the terms and conditions are displayed throughout the site and it is reasonable to accept that the driver had the opportunity to review these before parking. Furthermore, it is the motorist’s responsibility to check the terms and conditions of a site before parking.

By parking at the site, the driver has agreed to the terms and conditions and agreed to pay the parking charge notice if she does not comply with them. Consequently, by failing to enter her full, correct VRN as required in the sites terms and conditions the appellant has not complied with the sites terms and conditions.

Additionally, it is the appellant’s responsibility to ensure she complies with the sites terms and conditions. Finally, while I understand that the appellant’s wife was shopping in store, by failing to register the vehicle at the site she has contravened the terms of parking.

In conclusion, the operator has demonstrated to my satisfaction that the appellant has not complied with the sites terms and conditions. Therefore, I determine that the operator issued the parking charge notice correctly.

PE do not sue over Aldi sites so ignore this decision which was based on the sparse appeal you seem to have made.

You should have sent the receipt to Aldi to complain. Still can. If not, then sit tight and ignore the Equita letters because POPLA decisions are not binding on you.

Because I thought the case was so strong I didn't check for online help

Ooops! Your POPLA appeal should have covered more of the usual grounds and would have likely won.

In my view there has been no loss to Aldi

We agree, but that would NOT have been a valid appeal point and the Supreme Court decided in 2015 that ParkingEye can do what they damn well like and don't have to show loss, moving the goalposts regarding penalty law for this Capita-owned monster of a firm, whose money is made from the misery of motorist/shoppers and other victims at Hospitals and all over England & Wales.

If the Supreme Court had made the right decision...things would be different. But this Country has gone mad.

Never mind - lucky for you PE do not sue re Aldi sites and you proved she was an Aldi customer. IGNORE EQUITA DEMANDS.

Umkomaas

See comments against your post on the POPLA Decisions sticky. Go from there, but post any developments on this thread. Don't worry about this.

Redx

you can still complain to ALDI and try to get it cancelled, if you dont ask , and dont keep asking , you dont get

write stuff on their social media pages, that might give them a kick up the backside too

polar-bear

Aldi have said they can only help if I cancelled the POPLA appeal. I thought i had a good case so I didn't. Silly me! However I will email them again to see if they are prepared to do anything.

polar-bear

Here is my email to Aldi:

Dear xxxx,

Thanks for your advice. I wasn't able to cancel the POPLA appeal. Presumably you realise that if you cancel an appeal you cannot resubmit it later. I let it stand and the appeal was unsuccessful. I could have made a better decision if you had answered my query about whether Aldi would consider a valid receipt as evidence that a customer had parked legitimately.

For your information, the amount spent is immaterial. You only have to purchase something in the store and then enter your registration number into one of the store consoles. There is no need for any other check as you can then park for a further one and a half hours.

We are regular shoppers at Aldi, as are many of our friends. I am unhappy that a parking company working on your behalf is so unsympathetic in a situation where a machine error or a mistake can lead to a £70 parking charge.

In their rejection of my appeal Parking Eye state "You have provided evidence of purchase. However, this did not meet the discretionary criteria set out by the landowner in this case". They are therefore implying that you (Aldi) don't accept receipts in mitigation if your machines fail to record a registration number or a mistake is made. This seems grossly unfair. Under their Appeals and Complaints procedure Parking Eye state: "Please include all information to assist with the appeal. This may include a store receipt from the day in question, .....". I included a valid receipt, so clearly they do NOT accept such evidence. I have attached the receipt submitted to Parking Eye.

POPLA accepted that my wife had been shopping in the store at the time of the alleged offence, but despite this for reasons I don't fully understand, upheld Parking Eye's case. In any event, I understand that this decision has no legal significance, so I will continue to contest this charge.

I would therefore appreciate your comments before taking legal advice.

Kind regards,

xxxxxxx

On 07/01/2017 08:43, customer.service@aldi.co.uk wrote:
>
>
>
> emaillogo
>
> Dear Mr xxxxx
>
> Thanks for taking the time to contact us again.
>
> It is entirely up to yourself how you wish to progress with your appeal. If you would like to continue your appeal via POPLA, you are more than welcome to do so. Please note, however, that once POPLA make their determination, we would be unable to overturn their decision of offer any further assistance with your appeal.
>
> Without having the proof of purchase details and knowing how much your wife spent on the day, it would be difficult for us to comment on why ParkingEye rejected the appeal, but I can advise that they judge the appeal based on the amount spent cross referenced with the time spent at the store.
>
> I hope that this helps and if you would like our assistance further, please do not hesitate to contact us.
>
> Kind regards
>
> [Name removed by Forum Team]
>
>
> Aldi Parking Management
>
> Aldi Customer Services
> UK 0800 042 0800


>
> Ireland 1800 991 828

beamerguy

polar-bear wrote: »

Here is my email to Aldi:

[Name removed by Forum Team] of Aldi should be re-trained by saying

"but I can advise that they judge the appeal based on the amount spent cross referenced with the time spent at the store"

Guarantee the PE signs do not say that. It is the PE signs that they try to form a contract with.

Suggest you ask this employee of Aldi, for a breakdown of this "cross reference"

IE:
Amounts spent and times allowed for the amount.

This alone is something the customers of that store should be aware of and the best way is to contact your local press.

I would suggest this lady is truly talking out of her backside

Umkomaas

If you haven't already sent your email ask Aldi what the discretionary amount is, get that in black and white. Then ask why, if this is so important, signage,which purportedly forms the contract between PE and the motorist, doesn't contain any reference to it. It is therefore a 'hidden term' and that contravenes consumer legislation.

Tell them that in the event of this not being cancelled, you will be taking advice from Trading Standards on suing Aldi for this contravention by PE (as PE are their agents, Aldi is jointly and severally liable for their actions).

polar-bear

"but I can advise that they judge the appeal based on the amount spent cross referenced with the time spent at the store"

Guarantee the PE signs do not say that. It is the PE signs that they try to form a contract with.

Suggest you ask this employee of Aldi, for a breakdown of this "cross reference"

IE:
Amounts spent and times allowed for the amount.

She definitely doesn't know what she is talking about as their terms for free parking do not work that way,as I explained in my email. There is nothing to cross-reference. Or are you saying that I should just continue the dialogue?

beamerguy

polar-bear wrote: »

She definitely doesn't know what she is talking about as their terms for free parking do not work that way,as I explained in my email. There is nothing to cross-reference. Or are you saying that I should just continue the dialogue?

I would go straight to the MD

Mr Giles Hurley Managing Director

Email gmd.cs@aldi.co.uk

As said above this is one for Trading Standards

Tell the MD, that [Name removed by Forum Team] appears to have no knowledge of how the parking system operates and is therefore misleading customers. Request he cancels the ticket ... which he can

Just because POPLA failed to understand (which they often do) does not mean that PE cannot cancel it ..... of course they can.... at any time.

The MD should be made fully aware that such a statement by [Name removed by Forum Team],
leaves his company open to redress

polar-bear

I'll wait until I get a response from my email. I will try to attach photos taken from my phone today, showing the rather small ANPR information in the bottom right corner of a couple of signs. Not easy to read in my photos, but the same applies to the images they sent me. I am not sure how to upload images, though.
I'm waiting to hear back from Blaby District Council to find out if they had planning permission for the cameras and signage.
hxxp://s1036.photobucket.com/user/will3108/media/IMG_20170116_161421535_HDR_zpsaaht6sa8.jpg.html
hxxp://s1036.photobucket.com/user/will3108/media/IMG_20170116_161329100_zpsq16u80rb.jpg.html?sort=3&o=3