Ecp pcn

Couldey

Also anyone know if I can get the evidence pack loaded up here? But deleting/blanking out names, numbers etc?

Coupon-mad

I have had an email from Popla regarding the appeal. They have attached the evidence pack,

No, you've surely had an email from the parking firm, not POPLA.

Also anyone know if I can get the evidence pack loaded up here? But deleting/blanking out names, numbers etc?

Yes and then host it in Dropbox or similar and share the URL but 'break' it by changing http to hxxp as you are not quite able to post working links.

Couldey

No, you've surely had an email from the parking firm, not POPLA.

Hi Coupon-mad,

Thank you for your reply.

I've had an email from info@popla.co.uk, who have stated the below:

Dear XXXXXXX,

Your parking charge appeal against Euro Car Parks.

Euro Car Parks has now uploaded its evidence via our portal. This is now available for you to view by clicking here.

You have seven days from the date of this correspondence to provide comments on the evidence uploaded by Euro Car Parks.

Please note that these comments must relate to the grounds of appeal you submitted when first lodging your appeal with POPLA, we do not accept new grounds of appeal at this stage.

Any comments received after the period of seven days has ended will not be considered and we will progress your appeal for assessment.

If you have any issues with the evidence uploaded by Euro Car Parks such as being unable to view it online, please contact POPLA immediately so that we can look to rectify this as soon as possible.

Yours Sincerely,

POPLA Team


I've also uploaded most of the evidence pack on my photobucket, not all as half of it is signage.

hxxp://s149.photobucket.com/user/LCRuser/library/

I welcome your comments/advice/next steps

Coupon-mad

Ah, OK apologies, I found this confusing which suggested the email attached the evidence:

They have attached the evidence pack,

We will take a look!

Couldey

No worries and sorry about the confusion!

If there's any issues with the photobucket uploads, please let me know.

Couldey

Evening bump

Coupon-mad, are you able to asssit with the above? Or anyone as I only have until tommrow to put comments in, tonight's my only chance really due to being at work tommrow.

Thank you

Couldey

Late night bump!

Sorry about this as I need to submit my Popla appeal by tomorrow, can anyone help

Coupon-mad

I would answer that:

- the contract shows no expiry date and there is no evidence that it is still current since 2014

- the signatory name is unidentifiable.

- the signatory company is another middle-man agent, not the landowner:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/leighton-hamilton-management

- there is no evidence that authority flows from the actual Landowner to Euro Car Parks.

- the contract is dependent upon full compliance including point #6 which states: 'any particular conditions or restrictions must be clearly set out...' (on signage).

- The restrictions are not clearly set out. The entrance sign shown by the operator states: 'maximum stay 2 hours' which conflicts completely with the larger sign which provides for a stay of 4 hours. This cannot by any level of scrutiny, be deemed 'clear'.

- there are no images at all of any signs near the disabled bays, which are required under the BPA CoP so that a disabled driver/passenger can read the terms without getting out of the car. This was not the case, as per my appeal, which explains why just driving in, finding a space (no signs) getting out of the car to search for signs and find out the terms and decide to leave, took a very reasonable 16 minutes. This is quick when compared to able-bodied drivers, given that an occupant of the car has significant mobility issues and was using crutches.

- the BPA CoP states:

27 Disabled motorists
27.1 The Equality Act 2010 says that providers of services to
the public must make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to remove
barriers which may discriminate against disabled people.

27.2 ‘Reasonable adjustments’ to prevent discrimination are
likely to include larger ‘disabled’ parking spaces near to the
entrance or amenities for disabled people whose mobility
is impaired. It also could include lowered payment
machines and other ways to pay if payment is required:
for example, paying by phone. You and your staff need to
realise that some disabled people may take a long time to
get to the payment machine.

18.10 So that disabled motorists can decide whether they want to
use the site, there should be at least one sign containing the
terms and conditions for parking that can be viewed without
needing to leave the vehicle. Ideally this sign should be close
to any parking bays set aside for disabled motorists.

There is no evidence of the disabled bay signs (if any) and the occupants of the car state that there were no signs adjacent to those bays so the car had only passed the misleading 'maximum stay 2 hours' entrance sign and the driver neither saw nor accepted any other terms (2 hours being wrong anyway, yet that sign is in the evidence pack).

I appealed on the above basis, these are not new points but are my comments on the evidence which have failed to establish that the PCN was properly given, under the circumstances described, bearing in mind the lack of disabled bay signs and how long it took to decide whether to stay or go. The usual 'minimum ten minutes' grace period cannot apply to disabled motorists where they had to go in search of the terms, found out it was not free, got back into the car (with crutches) and drove out.

Couldey

Once again Coupon-mad you amaze me! Thank you for your help and prompt reply too!

I have submitted the above directly to POPLA via PDF and will update you once I get the decision. Fingers crossed :T

Couldey

Just checked my emails and saw POPLA have given there decision and it's SUCCESSFUL!

Coupon-mad your amazing!! Cannot thank you enough for your help on this matter. I would rather pay you the £45!!

I have to say, I never thought we would get a successful outcome, so glad I came to MSE and met Coupon-mad :T

Saying the above, the second appeal ref has come through the post, but i'l do another post on that shortly.

---

Decision Successful
Assessor Name Kirsty XXX
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as the motorist’s vehicle was parked without the motorist purchasing a valid pay and display/permit.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that they are the registered keeper of the vehicle and has not named the driver. The appellant has raised several grounds for appeal. These are as follows: • The appellant has questioned the operator’s authority from the landowner to issue and pursue PCN. • The appellant does not feel that the signage at the site is prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and that there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge. • The appellant says that the operator has not complied with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice. • The appellant does not believe that the signage warns drivers of what the data that the Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras capture will be used for. • The appellant does not believe that the operator has adhered to the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 in transferring liability to the registered keeper of the vehicle or the driver. • The appellant says that the grace periods are unclear and have not been applied properly.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
Reviewing the information provided in relation to this appeal, it appears that the registered keeper is appealing the charge. The appellant has not provided a full name and address for the driver to the operator, and as such, the operator is pursuing the keeper. For the operator to transfer liability for unpaid parking charges from the driver of the vehicle to the registered keeper of the vehicle, the regulations laid out in the PoFA must be adhered to. The operator has provided evidence of the Notice to Keeper (NTK) that has been issued. Paragraph 9 of schedule 4 of PoFA states: “(1) A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met. (2) The notice must – (f) warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given – (i) the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under the paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii) the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, The creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; (i) specify the date on which the notice is sent (where it is sent by post) or given (in any other case).” Upon reviewing the NTK provided by the parking operator, I can see that the date issued is 12 March 2017. The NTK states “You are advised that if, after 29 days from the date given (which is presumed to be the second working day after the Date Issued), the parking charge has not been paid in full and we do not know both the name and the current address of the driver, we have the right to recover any unpaid part of the parking charge from you”. The date the letter was given was 21 March 2017, however it states the date issued is 12 March 2017. As such, the operator has not complied with PoFA 2012 and I conclude that the operator has issued the PCN incorrectly. While I appreciate that the appellant has raised further grounds of appeal, as I have already allowed the appeal on this ground there is no need for me to further consider them. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.