Parking Eye PCN at Derby & Burton Services

Coupon-mad

Is it worth trying to explain where I was parked?

Nope - the opposite is true! This is for THEM to prove, not you! Do not talk about which signs you might have driven past, or walked past.


You need to add some bullet point comments that say:

- ParkingEye have failed to evidence where the car was parked, and from the confusing aerial 'view' it is impossible for me to tell.

- the aerial view is undated and the 'dots' could be added at any time so there is no evidence that all dots were current signs. They could be planned signs, since the operator has misleadingly included evidence of extra signs that they 'plan to add shortly'.

- This was a poorly-signed motorway services site, in driving rain, and no terms were seen except the invitation to drivers to stay/rest for 2 hours, an offer required by law.

- the fact it was very poorly signed is proved by virtue of ParkingEye included the misleading 'evidence' (which means nothing in terms of my visit) that they are adding more signs shortly. This suggests they know it is badly signed.

- the witness statement from the Services employee does not include which 'parking event on xx/xx/17' they are referring to. ParkingEye issue hundreds of PCNs every day on some sites and the witness statement does not identify my vehicle, nor is there any evidence that the Hotel area is not in fact leased separately by the Hotel.

AngelHarmony

As 2000 isn't enough for comments on evidence, should I use the email address that the POPLA email originally came through from (info@popla......)?

I've not been able to get on all week so now upto the wire as it's day 7 :shocked:

Having now gone through the evidence I conclude the following;

1. Although PE state they have written authority to operate on this private site, they've not provided any evidence to confirm it
2. On looking at the photo's of the camera's, their position looks to be at least 16+ft high & definitely not visible whilst driving into the car park, especially in the driving rain
3. Another photo of one of their sign's has a LWB Ford Transit van with the taller roof behind it, the bottom of the sign is at least as high as the van
4. The only photo's provided of my car are of it entering & exiting the car park, there is nothing to prove where I was actually parked
5. No witness statement provided

Coupon-mad, I think almost all of what you'd put is spot on! I've actually looked at the aerial view on Google (it was about the only photo they didn't include!) which actually shows how the food pub down the bottom end has it's own car park, there's a lorry/coach park & then the main car park with the hotel at the top end is just an open one, is it worth me sending these screen shots or will POPLA look themselves?

Any thoughts whilst I continue looking on here & putting my comments together (& hope the portal doesn't close at midnight!)

Many thanks in advance

Coupon-mad

Although PE state they have written authority to operate on this private site, they've not provided any evidence to confirm it

You will win then!

You can email POPLA if your comments don't fit, but keep them short.

Coupon-mad, I think almost all of what you'd put is spot on! I've actually looked at the aerial view on Google (it was about the only photo they didn't include!) which actually shows how the food pub down the bottom end has it's own car park, there's a lorry/coach park & then the main car park with the hotel at the top end is just an open one, is it worth me sending these screen shots or will POPLA look themselves?

POPLA will never take a look themselves, you have to feed them the winning point - however you cannot add new evidence at this stage, only comments adding to your appeal points you had to start with.

But with no landowner authority produced, not even a witness statement, they can't win.

AngelHarmony

In that case then shall I just tidy up my last post & submit that then (it might just fit)? xx

Coupon-mad

I would try to do that - amalgamate #1 with #5 (same point, really). And fit it in on the Portal.

AngelHarmony

Like this?

Dear POPLA Assessor

RE: XXXXXXXXXX

Having now gone through the evidence I conclude the following;

1. Although Parking Eye state they have written authority to operate at this Service Area, they've not provided any evidence to confirm it & no witness statement has been provided.

2. Parking Eye have failed to evidence where the car was parked, and from the evidence provided it is impossible for me to tell.

3. On looking at the photo's of the camera's, their position looks to be at least 18+ft high & definitely not visible whilst driving into the car park, especially in the driving rain on the 05.03.17

4. This was a poorly-signed motorway services site, in driving rain, and no terms were seen except the invitation to drivers to stay/rest for 2 hours, an offer required by law.

5. Another photo of one of their sign's has a high roof, LWB Ford Transit van behind it, the bottom of the sign is higher than the top of the van

6. The fact it was very poorly signed is proved by virtue of ParkingEye included the misleading 'evidence' (which means nothing in terms of my visit) that they are adding more signs shortly. This suggests they know it is badly signed.

7. The only photo's provided of my car are of it entering & exiting the car park, there is no evidence to prove exactly where I actually parked

Coupon-mad

Dear POPLA Assessor

RE: XXXXXXXXXX

No need for the above.

AngelHarmony

Thankfully all comments have now gone through so fingers crossed for the right outcome :whistle:

Thanks again Coupon-mad :starmod: xx

AngelHarmony

At last!! Huge thanks for all of the help & advice given, I couldn't have done this otherwise. Special thanks to Coupon-mad :beer:

Decision - Successful
Assessor Name Alexandra Wilcock
Assessor summary of operator case
The appellant parked on site without a valid permit, authorising the vehicle to park on site.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant states the signage is not clear. The appellant states the signage is not adequate as per the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012. She advised that the terms and conditions do not apply with the Roadway Services Area’s- Highway’s Agency circular 01/2008, set by Parliament. She says the operator has not provided any evidence to demonstrate that it has the appropriate landowner authorisation to issue Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the site in question. The appellant states the signage fails to inform motorists that the site is operated by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) systems. She says the operator has failed to comply with Consumer Rights Act 2015. She states the amount demanded by the operator is a penalty. The appellant states as a disabled motorist under the Equality Act 2012 she is entitled to reasonable adjustments. She advised it is her legal right to take a break due to personal needs.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The appellant says the operator has not provided any evidence to demonstrate that it has the appropriate landowner authorisation to issue PCN on the site in question. In terms of POPLA appeals, the burden of proof belongs with the operator to demonstrate it has issued the PCN correctly and to rebut the appellant’s grounds for appeal. I would expect the operator to provide written landowner authority or a valid witness statement to rebut the appellant claims, that the operator does not have landowner authority to issue PCN’s on the site in question. Section 7.3 of The BPA, Code of Practice states “The written authorisation must also set out: a the definition of the land on which you may operate”. I appreciate the operator has stated in its summary that the operator does have landowner authority to enforce parking restrictions however; the operator has not provided any evidence to demonstrate this. As I am not able to determine whether the operator has landowner authorisation to issue PCN’s due to no evidence of this being provided, I can only conclude that the PCN was issued incorrectly.

Redx

well done

this seems to have been a text book example of how an appeal should be gone through with good advice to a newbie who didnt realise that the PPC has to prove its case, including evidence like landowner contracts

it wasnt up to the apellant to prove their case, but to refute and rebut the PE case , which was exactly what happened , including the rebuttal to the PE evidence pack

had we known that PE would not or could not provide a landowner contract, it could have been a single point appeal

maybe others going through this process could learn from this thread what the real crack is with these things