Euro car park parking charge notice

Coupon-mad

verynicelady wrote: »

Hi RedX

Probably a daft question but need to ask, when I've got to the point of uploading my pdf it sits next to a green bin icon like you mentioned... As I haven't ever sent a pdf file before I was wondering if it's attached correctly before I send as wouldn't want to send to popla and it not be there. When I have attched files before I have alway's been able to open them to double check they are there. This pdf attachment isn't like that and you can't open it, is that how it works? Thanks VNL

Not a daft question at all. It's a horrible system!

I have submitted hundreds of POPLA appeals for people and I too feel really uncomfortable that the 'bin icon' doesn't let you check what was uploaded - eeek, I thought, what if I'd sent them a photo of my DD's guinea pig?!

I've even logged out before now with these, and started again, if I wasn't sure that I had uploaded the right file, if distracted. But as long as you are sure, yes, it is there.

You can always email POPLA and ask if the PDF uploaded properly and tell them how awful the website is for consumers (because it is, also in that the questions ask the keeper to say things like ''I didn't see the signs'' (very clearly BPA-written, we assume).
Completely unfair on clueless appellants who could otherwise win easily as keeper.

That and the warning to ''put the appeal in your own words'' is all capable of setting people up for a fall. Misleading trash from POPLA.

verynicelady

Hi CM, one last ask!! RedX doesn't know the answer to my question and has mentioned you have a thread which explains my quandary regarding what I wrote
" Probably a daft question but need to ask, when I've got to the point of uploading my pdf it sits next to a green bin icon like you mentioned... As I haven't ever sent a pdf file before I was wondering if it's attached correctly before I send as wouldn't want to send to popla and it not be there. When I have attched files before I have alway's been able to open them to double check they are there. This pdf attachment isn't like that and you can't open it, is that how it works? Could you please with all your knowledge let me know if this is correct? I wouldn't want to sent to Popla and them not receive the attachment. Kind RegardsVNL :rotfl:

Coupon-mad

But I answered that, above?

verynicelady

Thank you, Sorry my computer froze, I have now submitted my appeal. Thank you so very much for all your knowledge, I will keep you posted as to my outcome. xxx

verynicelady

Hi Coupon-mad, I would just like to thank you and every other person who gave me information regarding the ECP parking charge. These thanks are from the bottom of my heart.
With all the advice from your amazing web page, I managed to put together lots of information which was then forwarded onto POPLA; they have come to a final decision and the parking charge has been CANCELLED :T:T Mant thanks again VNL xx

Umkomaas

Yay, well done you VNL. :T

Could you copy and paste the reasons for the POPLA decision. It will help us to update on what POPLA are currently upholding appeals so we can better inform those who are, or will be, following the path you have just trodden.

Nice glass of something tonight, I presume?

verynicelady

Certainly, I will get on it right away xxx

verynicelady

Would you like the assessors name also????

Umkomaas

verynicelady wrote: »

Would you like the assessors name also????

MSE Towers are a bit tetchy about that, but rather than put Joe Bloggs, you could just put Joe B, we'll work it out. If it's a real problem for MSE, they'll soon just scrub the name.

verynicelady

[FONT=&quot]Decision[/FONT]
Successful
[FONT=&quot]Assessor Name[/FONT]
Safoora S

[FONT=&quot]Assessor summary of operator case[/FONT]
The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as no valid pay and display/permit was purchased.
[FONT=&quot]Assessor summary of your case[/FONT]
The appellant has raised several grounds of appeal such as: • The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge. (ref POPLA case Carly Law 6061796103) • Amount demanded is a penalty • Landowner Authority • Photo evidence appears doctored • Signage • Euro Car Parks Notice to Keeper 'issued/given' dates conflict and do not comply with Schedule 4 - no keeper liability. • No Grace Period Given (Clause #13 BPA Code of Practice)
[FONT=&quot]Assessor supporting rational for decision[/FONT]
The operator issued a PCN to the appellant as no valid pay and display/permit was purchased. The appellant has raised several grounds of appeal such as: • The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge. (ref POPLA case Carly Law 6061796103) • Amount demanded is a penalty • Landowner Authority • Photo evidence appears doctored • Signage • Euro Car Parks Notice to Keeper 'issued/given' dates conflict and do not comply with Schedule 4 - no keeper liability. • No Grace Period Given (Clause #13 BPA Code of Practice) When a parking operator is pursuing a keeper as liable for a charge, it must satisfy the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012). Within PoFA 2012 it states at Paragraph 9(2)(f) that the notice to keeper must: “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 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;” As such, transfer of liability occurs after ‘28 days beginning with the day after the date the notice is given’. Within PoFA 2012, it further states that: “a notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales.” Therefore, it is clear that the date the Notice to Keeper was posted is the key date in determining when the 28-day period begins. Having considered the Notice to Keeper sent in this instance, the wording used is as follows: “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. This notice is given to you under Paragraph 9(2)(f) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and is subject to our complying with the applicable conditions under Schedule 4 of the Act.” However, I note that the “Date Issued” referred to above is not the date the Notice to Keeper was posted and is instead, the date of the parking event. As such, it is clear that while the operator has attempted to comply with the requirements of Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012, its reference to the “Date Issued” is incorrect and the impact of this is that the keeper would not be given the correct length of time to provide details of the driver. On this basis, I can only conclude that the Notice to Keeper would fail to meet the strict requirements of PoFA 2012. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.