We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Lost POPLA appeal - disabled badge
socialbutterfly1
Posts: 15 Forumite
Right guys, before you start saying I should have come here, I did! And I consulted many other forums before appealing the ticket from UKPC and then to POPLA
I parked up in a UKPC car park in a disabled bay (where its free to park for 4 hours) as I exited my car, my knocked my badge off (I later realised) I saw the attendant at my car giving me a ticket so I came out and asked why, then to discover the badge had fallen off and the parking attendant said he had already issued the ticket. He said to appeal the ticket and it would be voided, I was unsuccessful when I appealed to UKPC and then unsuccessful to POPLA.
Here's what I sent to POPLA
Dear POPLA,
I would like to further appeal a UKPC fine based on the two points below;
1. I am a registered disabled individual with a valid blue badge. I parked up in a disabled bay, displaying my blue badge - which unknowingly to me had fallen off the dash when I exited my car.
I saw the parking attendant issuing a parking fine at my car and came out of the shop to speak with him. I showed the parking attendant my blue badge and from my appearance it is clear to see I have a physical disability. The parking attendant explained that as he had already issued the fine, and if I contested it, UKPC would cancel it as I have a valid blue badge.
So I submitted an appeal to UKPC through their appeals process explaining the situation and including a copy of my blue badge. Unfortunately, UKPC have decided to continue with the charge of £15. I feel the charge of £15 is unreasonable as the first four hours are free to park, and I was parked for no more than one hour, meaning UKPC has received no loss.
2. My vehicle registration number was also incorrect on the PCN, meaning the Notice to Driver was not compliant with the BPA CoP and POFA 2012 and was a nullity, as it had the wrong VRN on it. Therefore, no Notice to Driver was properly given.
I would like to cite a relevant case - Excel v Greenwood, Case Number 3QT60496 (4/10/2013) which was about a slipped Blue Badge, where the Judge found in favour of the defendant and held that Excel should have made a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act anyway.
By virtue of their disability, disabled people such as the driver can be more likely to forget or knock down our Blue Badge (more commonly than an able-bodied driver may forget or knock down any other sort of permit) but this sort of incident does not suddenly take away their lawful right to use the bay, nor does it take away the disability of course.
Under the Equality Act 2010, the driver has 'Protected Characteristics' which extends to them the unequivocal right to use any 'reasonable adjustment' provided by any landholder/client/operator when visiting a customer-facing environment, including car parks.
In short, the Act says that protected people and their carers can legally use any disability provision applicable to them, and in the case of a disabled bay this would be with or without a Blue Badge (the Act has nothing to say about permits and badges because the legal right is established by need).
Any term that UKPC may have on their signs to the effect 'Blue Badges only' is null and void if the effect is to deny a disabled person the statutory right to use a reasonable adjustment without penalty.
This continued attempt to pursue this 'charge' under these circumstances is unlawful harassment of, and direct discrimination against, a known disabled person who has clearly and reasonably established to UKPC that they are protected by the Equality Act 2010.
I respectfully request POPLA to consider the points above and ask that this appeal be voided.
Here's what I received back from POPLA - basically what they are saying is because I didn't say my disability could have made me forget to display my badge - but this is absurd! Yes, I have disabled and I live with a rare genetic condition but I'm not going to pretend to be more disabled than I am.
The parking attendant could clearly see I have a disability and I provided them with a copy of my valid blue badge.
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
Adele Brophy
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to the appellant’s vehicle parking in a disabled bay without displaying a blue disabled badge.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that the PCN amount of £15.00 is unreasonable as the first four hours are free to park, meaning there was no loss to the operator. The appellant has further advised that the vehicle registration number was also incorrect on the PCN, meaning the Notice to Driver was not compliant with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice. The appellant has referred to Excel v Greenwood, a Court case that they consider is the same circumstances as his. The appellant states this case also concerned a slipped Blue Badge and the Judge found in favour of the defendant and held that Excel should have made a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act. The appellant has lastly advised that they are a registered disabled individual with a valid blue badge, and they parked up in a disabled bay, displaying the blue badge - which unknowingly to them had fallen off the dash when exiting the vehicle.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
The terms and conditions of the car park are, “Failure to comply with the following at any time will result in a £100 Parking Charge being issued to the vehicle’s driver. Disabled badge holders only in disabled bays, valid disabled badge must be clearly displayed at all times”. The operator issued a PCN due to the appellant’s vehicle parking in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a blue disabled badge. The appellant has advised that the PCN charge amount is unreasonable and no loss was incurred. This has recently been the subject of a high profile court case, ParkingEye-v-Beavis. Cambridge County Court heard the case initially, handing down a decision in May 2014 that a parking charge of £85 was allowable. It held that the parking charge had the characteristics of a penalty, in the sense in which that expression is conventionally used, but one that was commercially justifiable because it was neither improper in its purpose nor manifestly excessive in its amount. Mr Beavis took the case to the Court of Appeal, which refused the appeal in April 2015, stating that the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable. Mr Beavis further appealed to the Supreme Court, which on 4 November 2015, concluded: “…the £85 charge is not a penalty. Both ParkingEye and the landowners had a legitimate interest in charging overstaying motorists, which extended beyond the recovery of any loss. The interest of the landowners was the provision and efficient management of customer parking for the retail outlets. The interest of ParkingEye was in income from the charge, which met the running costs of a legitimate scheme plus a profit margin. Further, the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable, having regard to practice around the United Kingdom, and taking into account the use of this particular car park and the clear wording of the notices”. Having considered the decision of the Supreme Court decision, I conclude that the parking charge in this instance is allowable. Although the charge may not be a genuine pre-estimate of loss; the signage at the location is clear, the motorist did not keep to the terms and conditions set out on the signage, and the charge is neither extravagant nor unconscionable. While the charge in this instance was £100, this is in the region of the £85 charge decided on by the Supreme Court. The appellant has advised that the case of Excel v Greenwood is relevant to this appeal. Firstly, I would advise this case is a County Court judgement and is therefore not binding. Further, the appellant has not provided a transcript and I have not been able to find one. It is therefore impossible to know exactly what the judge said. However, from the information that I do have about Excel V Greenwood, the case is about a person who had forgotten to display his blue disabled badge. He suffered from Multiple Sclerosis, which he stated caused him to forget to display his blue disabled badge. In this case, it was clear that the motorist’s disability created a disadvantage to him and a reasonable adjustment was appropriate. After considering the evidence and comments provided in this appeal, I do not consider the case relevant to this appeal. The appellant has advised that they were aware of the requirement to display a blue badge. They even state they displayed the disabled blue badge, but that it slipped off the dashboard. As such, I do not consider there is a failure to provide a reasonable adjustment as it is clear that the appellant’s disability is not connected to the failure to follow the terms and conditions. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that when they enter a car park, they have understood the terms and conditions of parking. If the driver was in disagreement with the terms and conditions of the site or felt that the terms and conditions of the site could not be adhered to for whatever reason, there would have been sufficient time to leave the site without entering into a contract with the operator. When looking at appeals, POPLA considers whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. Based on the evidence provided, a parking contract was formed by the driver’s decision to enter the location and park. By parking outside of a marked bay, parking obstructively the driver failed to meet the terms and conditions of that parking contract. As such on this occasion, I consider the operator has issued the PCN correctly.
So what should I do? I don't feel that this is fair, they made a mistake by putting in the wrong registration and I accidentally knocked off my valid blue badge. I know the press would love this story!
I parked up in a UKPC car park in a disabled bay (where its free to park for 4 hours) as I exited my car, my knocked my badge off (I later realised) I saw the attendant at my car giving me a ticket so I came out and asked why, then to discover the badge had fallen off and the parking attendant said he had already issued the ticket. He said to appeal the ticket and it would be voided, I was unsuccessful when I appealed to UKPC and then unsuccessful to POPLA.
Here's what I sent to POPLA
Dear POPLA,
I would like to further appeal a UKPC fine based on the two points below;
1. I am a registered disabled individual with a valid blue badge. I parked up in a disabled bay, displaying my blue badge - which unknowingly to me had fallen off the dash when I exited my car.
I saw the parking attendant issuing a parking fine at my car and came out of the shop to speak with him. I showed the parking attendant my blue badge and from my appearance it is clear to see I have a physical disability. The parking attendant explained that as he had already issued the fine, and if I contested it, UKPC would cancel it as I have a valid blue badge.
So I submitted an appeal to UKPC through their appeals process explaining the situation and including a copy of my blue badge. Unfortunately, UKPC have decided to continue with the charge of £15. I feel the charge of £15 is unreasonable as the first four hours are free to park, and I was parked for no more than one hour, meaning UKPC has received no loss.
2. My vehicle registration number was also incorrect on the PCN, meaning the Notice to Driver was not compliant with the BPA CoP and POFA 2012 and was a nullity, as it had the wrong VRN on it. Therefore, no Notice to Driver was properly given.
I would like to cite a relevant case - Excel v Greenwood, Case Number 3QT60496 (4/10/2013) which was about a slipped Blue Badge, where the Judge found in favour of the defendant and held that Excel should have made a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act anyway.
By virtue of their disability, disabled people such as the driver can be more likely to forget or knock down our Blue Badge (more commonly than an able-bodied driver may forget or knock down any other sort of permit) but this sort of incident does not suddenly take away their lawful right to use the bay, nor does it take away the disability of course.
Under the Equality Act 2010, the driver has 'Protected Characteristics' which extends to them the unequivocal right to use any 'reasonable adjustment' provided by any landholder/client/operator when visiting a customer-facing environment, including car parks.
In short, the Act says that protected people and their carers can legally use any disability provision applicable to them, and in the case of a disabled bay this would be with or without a Blue Badge (the Act has nothing to say about permits and badges because the legal right is established by need).
Any term that UKPC may have on their signs to the effect 'Blue Badges only' is null and void if the effect is to deny a disabled person the statutory right to use a reasonable adjustment without penalty.
This continued attempt to pursue this 'charge' under these circumstances is unlawful harassment of, and direct discrimination against, a known disabled person who has clearly and reasonably established to UKPC that they are protected by the Equality Act 2010.
I respectfully request POPLA to consider the points above and ask that this appeal be voided.
Here's what I received back from POPLA - basically what they are saying is because I didn't say my disability could have made me forget to display my badge - but this is absurd! Yes, I have disabled and I live with a rare genetic condition but I'm not going to pretend to be more disabled than I am.
The parking attendant could clearly see I have a disability and I provided them with a copy of my valid blue badge.
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
Adele Brophy
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) due to the appellant’s vehicle parking in a disabled bay without displaying a blue disabled badge.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that the PCN amount of £15.00 is unreasonable as the first four hours are free to park, meaning there was no loss to the operator. The appellant has further advised that the vehicle registration number was also incorrect on the PCN, meaning the Notice to Driver was not compliant with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice. The appellant has referred to Excel v Greenwood, a Court case that they consider is the same circumstances as his. The appellant states this case also concerned a slipped Blue Badge and the Judge found in favour of the defendant and held that Excel should have made a reasonable adjustment under the Equality Act. The appellant has lastly advised that they are a registered disabled individual with a valid blue badge, and they parked up in a disabled bay, displaying the blue badge - which unknowingly to them had fallen off the dash when exiting the vehicle.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
The terms and conditions of the car park are, “Failure to comply with the following at any time will result in a £100 Parking Charge being issued to the vehicle’s driver. Disabled badge holders only in disabled bays, valid disabled badge must be clearly displayed at all times”. The operator issued a PCN due to the appellant’s vehicle parking in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a blue disabled badge. The appellant has advised that the PCN charge amount is unreasonable and no loss was incurred. This has recently been the subject of a high profile court case, ParkingEye-v-Beavis. Cambridge County Court heard the case initially, handing down a decision in May 2014 that a parking charge of £85 was allowable. It held that the parking charge had the characteristics of a penalty, in the sense in which that expression is conventionally used, but one that was commercially justifiable because it was neither improper in its purpose nor manifestly excessive in its amount. Mr Beavis took the case to the Court of Appeal, which refused the appeal in April 2015, stating that the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable. Mr Beavis further appealed to the Supreme Court, which on 4 November 2015, concluded: “…the £85 charge is not a penalty. Both ParkingEye and the landowners had a legitimate interest in charging overstaying motorists, which extended beyond the recovery of any loss. The interest of the landowners was the provision and efficient management of customer parking for the retail outlets. The interest of ParkingEye was in income from the charge, which met the running costs of a legitimate scheme plus a profit margin. Further, the charge was neither extravagant nor unconscionable, having regard to practice around the United Kingdom, and taking into account the use of this particular car park and the clear wording of the notices”. Having considered the decision of the Supreme Court decision, I conclude that the parking charge in this instance is allowable. Although the charge may not be a genuine pre-estimate of loss; the signage at the location is clear, the motorist did not keep to the terms and conditions set out on the signage, and the charge is neither extravagant nor unconscionable. While the charge in this instance was £100, this is in the region of the £85 charge decided on by the Supreme Court. The appellant has advised that the case of Excel v Greenwood is relevant to this appeal. Firstly, I would advise this case is a County Court judgement and is therefore not binding. Further, the appellant has not provided a transcript and I have not been able to find one. It is therefore impossible to know exactly what the judge said. However, from the information that I do have about Excel V Greenwood, the case is about a person who had forgotten to display his blue disabled badge. He suffered from Multiple Sclerosis, which he stated caused him to forget to display his blue disabled badge. In this case, it was clear that the motorist’s disability created a disadvantage to him and a reasonable adjustment was appropriate. After considering the evidence and comments provided in this appeal, I do not consider the case relevant to this appeal. The appellant has advised that they were aware of the requirement to display a blue badge. They even state they displayed the disabled blue badge, but that it slipped off the dashboard. As such, I do not consider there is a failure to provide a reasonable adjustment as it is clear that the appellant’s disability is not connected to the failure to follow the terms and conditions. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that when they enter a car park, they have understood the terms and conditions of parking. If the driver was in disagreement with the terms and conditions of the site or felt that the terms and conditions of the site could not be adhered to for whatever reason, there would have been sufficient time to leave the site without entering into a contract with the operator. When looking at appeals, POPLA considers whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. Based on the evidence provided, a parking contract was formed by the driver’s decision to enter the location and park. By parking outside of a marked bay, parking obstructively the driver failed to meet the terms and conditions of that parking contract. As such on this occasion, I consider the operator has issued the PCN correctly.
So what should I do? I don't feel that this is fair, they made a mistake by putting in the wrong registration and I accidentally knocked off my valid blue badge. I know the press would love this story!
0
Comments
-
when you informed the ppc that you had a protected characteristic under the equality act they should have cancelled the parking charge there and then.
likewise when you contacted the landowner about their agents actions, the landowner should have instructed the parking company to cancel.
What happened when you informed the car park owner?From the Plain Language Commission:
"The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"0 -
I followed the appeals process for both UKPC and POPLA, I haven't contacted anyone else - are UKPC the car park owners?0
-
Never. Nope.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD0 -
So what should i do?0
-
You need to find out who's car park it was/is
and stop frettingFrom the Plain Language Commission:
"The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"0 -
It's Royale Leisure Park
Kendal Avenue
Park Royal
London
W3 0PA0 -
The land owner is Car Giant0
-
Unfortunately by admitting you were the driver you have lost the protection of the protection of freedom act.
However, this is only UKPC and nothing to fear. They don't normally do court although that could change. In the unlikely event they try court in the next six years, come back here for further help.
As you have already seen, a judge would no doubt find in your favour so this is further reason not to worry. UKPC are scammers and were caught doctoring time stamps on their photo' "evidence" a while ago.
I think a judge would believe your version of events. UKPC know this so are unlikely to chance their arm.
Meanwhile, complain to the landowner or manager of the facility you were visiting.I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.
All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
I contacted the landowner and they said it's nothing to do with them, and they don't manage the parking or issue and tickets.0
-
get that in writing, so if you receive court papers it can be produced to the judge as a part of your defence0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards