ParkingEye POPLA - Lease Vehicle

pelfed_new

Made the mistake of appealing parkingEye ticket/invoice before finding this forum.
I have now to make a 2nd appeal to POPLA (I have the ref number needed).

Reading through the Newbie thread, I can see info regarding appealing for HIRE cars, but not about 2nd stage appeal.

ParkingEye never sent out the correct documents needed, and it seems this is usually the case with them.

Does anyone have a cut and paste template for 2nd Stage appeal? Or can I just use the 1st stage ones as are listed in the newbie section?

Half_way

Templates used as is can be a bad move, however if you find one adjust it to your needs and post it up here.
you may need to supply a little more information in order to get some help in getting this cancelled, in some/most cases this can be achieved without even using POPLA/dealing with parking eye, however you need to be aware of the time scale as parking eye have their own arbitrary time limits which, unless you really want some hard work should not be ignored.

Has the Lease company charged you an admin fee?
if so what are the terms of the lease company?
Where did you park, and how was the original charge picked up? a landowner cancellation is one way to see these parasites off.

Edna_Basher

You can find some example POPLA appeal paragraphs in the POPLA Decisions Sticky Thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4488337

Post #2346 covers non-compliant Notices to Hirer and can be tailored to suit. However, this will only be of use if you didn't reveal who was driving when you first appealed to ParkingEye. Hopefully you appealed as the Hirer / Lessee.

pelfed_new

Hi - Lease company not charged a fee.
it happened at a hospital and I tried to contact the person in charge at said hospital, who told me to phonr parkingEye (which I didn't). I lodged appeal (before I found this forum) and it was rejected. ParkingEye sent me a rejection email which gave me the ref no for POPLA.

The point really is that ParkingEye didn't follow the strict guide lines as set out in Schedule 4 of POFA.
There are mandatory paperwork requirements as far as the lease goes that ParkingEye should have sent with the NTK for POFA2012 to kick in.

I have read Edna Basher post (forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=69859059#post69859059)

Here is what I assume would be okay to appeal to POPLA?

Dear Sir,

Parking Charge Notice [0123456789]: Vehicle Registration [AA11ABC]: POPLA Reference:1234567890

I refer to the above-detailed Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) issued to me by ParkingEye Ltd as a Notice to Hirer. I confirm that as the hirer of this vehicle, I am its keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”) and I write to formally challenge the validity of this PCN.

You will no doubt be familiar with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of POFA to be followed in order for a parking operator to be able to invoke keeper liability for a Parking Charge. There are a number of reasons why ParkingEyess Notice to Hirer did not comply with POFA; in order that you may understand why, I suggest that you carefully study the details of Paragraphs 13 and 14 of Schedule 4 in particular.

Consequently ParkingEye has forfeited its right to keeper liability, please confirm that you shall now cancel this charge.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.


Yours faithfully,

Edna_Basher

Nope - that's the letter which should be used in the initial appeal to the parking company.

The POPLA stage is a different kettle of fish.

Coupon-mad

Here is what I assume would be okay to appeal to POPLA?

Did you miss post #3 of the NEWBIES thread with the POPLA wording templates?

pelfed_new

Thanks Eda, thats what I thought. i found your link to the below. I'm about to go into POPLA appeal Step 1. What is the best reason to choose.... "I was not the driver etc" or "Other"

The Operator failed to deliver a Notice to Hirer that was fully compliant with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”)

In order to rely upon POFA to claim unpaid parking charges from a vehicle’s hirer, an operator must deliver a Notice to Hirer in full compliance with POFA’s strict requirements. In this instance, the Operator’s Notice to Hirer did not comply.

The relevant provisions concerning hire vehicles are set out in Paragraphs 13 and 14 of Schedule 4 of POFA with the conditions that the Creditor must meet in order to be able to hold the hirer liable for the charge being set out in Paragraph 14.

Paragraph 14 (2) (a) specifies that in addition to delivering a Notice to Hirer within the relevant period, the Creditor must also provide the Hirer with a copy of the documents mentioned in Paragraph 13(2) (i.e. (a) a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b) a copy of the hire agreement; and (c) a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement), together with a copy of the Notice to Keeper (i.e. the notice that had originally been sent to the lease company (as Registered Keeper)). The Operator did not provide me with copies of any of these documents.


[Include this additional paragraph if the Notice to Hirer only refers to the Notice to Keeper and not to the information contained in the Notice to Keeper].

Paragraph 14 (5) (b) specifies that the Notice to Hirer must refer the hirer to the information contained in the Notice to Keeper. The Operator’s Notice to Hirer refers only to the Notice to Keeper, not to the information contained in the Notice to Keeper. This is a fundamental omission, especially given that the Operator did not provide me with a copy of the Notice to Keeper as required under Paragraph 14 (2) (a). Consequently, the Operator failed to provide me with much of the information required to be included in the Notice to Keeper under Paragraph 9 (2) of Schedule 4 of POFA.

[Alternatively, include this additional paragraph if the Notice to Hirer does not even refer to the Notice to Keeper].

Paragraph 14 (5) (b) specifies that the Notice to Hirer must refer the hirer to the information contained in the Notice to Keeper. The Operator’s Notice to Hirer does not even refer to the Notice to Keeper. This is a fundamental omission, especially given that the Operator did not provide me with a copy of the Notice to Keeper as required under Paragraph 14 (2) (a). Consequently, the Operator failed to provide me with much of the information required to be included in the Notice to Keeper under Paragraph 9 (2) of Schedule 4 of POFA.


Should the Operator try to suggest that there is any other method whereby a vehicle’s keeper (or hirer) can be held liable for a charge where a driver is not identified, I draw POPLA’s attention to the guidance given to operators in POPLA's 2015 Annual Report by Henry Greenslade, Chief Adjudicator in which he reminded them of a keeper's (or hirer's) right not to name the driver whilst still not being held liable for an unpaid parking charge under Schedule 4 of POFA. Although I trust that POPLA's assessors are already very familiar with the contents of this report, for ease of reference I set out a link as follows:

popla.co.uk/docs/default-source/default-document-library/popla_annualreport_2015.pdf?sfvrsn=2

I draw POPLA’s particular attention to the section entitled “Keeper Liability” in which Mr. Greenslade explains that:

“There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the keeper of the vehicle.......
.......... However keeper information is obtained, there is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered keeper of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a keeper sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver”.

Through its failure to deliver a compliant Notice to Hirer, the Operator has forfeited its right to claim unpaid parking charges from the vehicle’s hirer. For this reason alone, POPLA may determine that the Operator’s claim against me is invalid.

Coupon-mad

Not nearly long enough - see post #3 of the NEWBIES thread.

Edna_Basher

Whoa, steady on. You only get once chance to submit via POPLA's website.

Unless your POPLA Code is in imminent danger of expiring, take a bit of time to compose your full submission, picking up other points including inadequate signage, lack of landholder authority etc.

Then post it up here for the Forum regulars to review.

pelfed_new

To be Honest i don't really understand what I am doing despite reading the threads. And with a new baby on the way my head cannot get into gear.
Might be easier to pay the reduced fine as I can see it now that I will probably fail in the attempt with POPLA. I can't even get past Step 1 LOL

Coupon-mad

Look at it again tomorrow and use the templates in post #3 of the NEWBIES thread, already written for you to copy like everyone else does. Show us the templates put together.

DO NOT PAY - THAT WOULD BE SPONSORING THE NEXT PCNs.