ECP Appeal Rejected after following MSE Advice

Redx

presumably its their "evidence pack"

you need to search the forum for any REBUTTALS for this task over the last 12 months or so and use those rebuttals to draft your own rebuttal to their evidence pack

you cannot introduce new evidence so you take issue with theirs by going through it and rebutting all the inaccuracies etc

the_wheels_have_fallen_of

the_wheels_have_fallen_of wrote: »

Hello Everyone

My friends at ECP have now sent me the POPLA appeal pack back. To my very untrained eye - it all looks very standard and cut and paste job.

For example, they have given examples of "gladstones compliant NTK" - I didnt appeal anything about a non-compliant NTK !!

Theyve also sent pictures of my car (def my car) with my reg on it arriving and leaving the ANPR monitored car park as well as a load of signage and a map of the signage.

This has been emailed to me this afternoon - can anyone help with next steps please ??

Many thanks !

BINGO - I might just have something here.... Says the correct date for the PCN issued - says that the hours of operation for "free" period are 0600 to 2159 for 2 HOURS. Yet the signage (that they sent in the pack says 1 1/2 h max stay) and that the PCN was issued 5 December 16 (correct). Then, they go on to say that "an official appeal representation was raised by XXX on 13 November 2016" .... interesting... bearing in mind the alleged offence was only committed on 23 November - as per their ANPR camera info that they have sent.

Therefore, if it is indeed 2 Hours (as stated) then the driver was overparked for 29 minutes. What they fail to say (but they show it in the picture) is that there is a refrigerated Aldi Lorry is permanently parked (trailer only) not the cab, across a number of the already scarce parent and child spaces. This leaves 3 (I think P&C spaces). Bearing in mind the driver on the day had an 18 month old child with them and was doing Christmas shopping on this busy retail park (a few weeks before Christmas) then is there something to raise about having to drive round waiting for P&C to become free?

the_wheels_have_fallen_of

Redx wrote: »

presumably its their "evidence pack"

you need to search the forum for any REBUTTALS for this task over the last 12 months or so and use those rebuttals to draft your own rebuttal to their evidence pack

you cannot introduce new evidence so you take issue with theirs by going through it and rebutting all the inaccuracies etc

Hi RedX

Full of inaccuracies... please see last post - many thanks

Redx

driving round looking for a space is not "parking", as was seen in the ivor pecheque court case a few years ago at FISTRAL BEACH , so this may be used although popla wont care how many spaces were blocked or available

remember, popla only rule on legal arguments , POFA failures, CRA 2015 failures , beavis case law , contract laws , signage , BPA CoP errors , flaws in "evidence" etc

abd P+C bays have no legal standing whatsoever

the_wheels_have_fallen_of

Redx wrote: »

driving round looking for a space is not "parking", as was seen in the ivor pecheque court case a few years ago at FISTRAL BEACH , so this may be used although popla wont care how many spaces were blocked or available

remember, popla only rule on legal arguments , POFA failures, CRA 2015 failures , beavis case law , contract laws , signage , BPA CoP errors , flaws in "evidence" etc

abd P+C bays have no legal standing whatsoever

Thanks RedX - so therefore, the advice is to go after "inaccuracies" as well as the rebuttal posts you suggest?

Redx

definitely, the more you tear into the PPC, the more likely the popla assessor will see a clear winner and back your horse

you only have to win on a single technicality

the_wheels_have_fallen_of

Redx wrote: »

definitely, the more you tear into the PPC, the more likely the popla assessor will see a clear winner and back your horse

Well even after one read, RedX and thats not printing off and finding all inaccuracies - I have found - registered keepers name spelt incorrectly and spelt differently each time its used; incorrect use of Fairlie vs Fenton, Appeal date is incorrect (apparently occurred before the alleged offence...), Parking term states 2 hours yet signage and other information say 1 1/2 hours, Landowner authority allegedly agreed 2013 yet "signed" document provided is dated 29 October 2016 by "Robert Plant" and "Mr Smith" !!!!! (in the same handwriting !!) and the photos of the vehicle provided (the actual vehicle) could have been taken anywhere on site and do not show any particular location ie entering or leaving the ANPR controlled site

Coupon-mad

yet "signed" document provided is dated 29 October 2016 by "Robert Plant" and "Mr Smith" !!!!! (in the same handwriting !!)

Oooh, show us a link!

Hope you have put in your rebuttal as POPLA allow mere days...

the_wheels_have_fallen_of

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Oooh, show us a link!

Hope you have put in your rebuttal as POPLA allow mere days...

Hey Coupon-Mad !! The ECP "evidence pack" arrived by email on Monday - with no instructions or anything - I did put a quick post up I think it was last night, asking how long I have to rebut the evidence...RedX says 7 days...Tonights job is to draft the letter. How can I show you a link here - shall I PM you it ?

I have been closely reading the Rebuttals section on the Newbies Sticky that you started. I am currently reading the links to an LCP parking ticket that someone won but it was late 2014/2015 (stevedrums and lynneh) - would you say that thats still a valid rebuttal? Im particularly interested in the fact that on one post it says that there should be some sort of "number" attached to landowner approval - its not on this "piece of paper " theyve sent me - its hilarious !!:rotfl:

the_wheels_have_fallen_of

PS - how long does the parking company have to send an "evidence pack"? POPLA appeal submited 20 Jan - evidence pack received 20 Feb