POPLA Appeal NPS Halfords No Permit

HolyPigeon

Hi everyone, and thank you to those who provide help on this forum. I have read and learned a lot here recently.

Summary:

• Windscreen PCN for no permit
• Driver does not have valid permit
• PPC appeal rejected
• NtK not received
• POPLA deadline in a week

The driver of the car received a windscreen PCN in a Halfords Autocentre car park from Northern Parking Services. It was after 7pm and the business was closed. There were no other cars parked. There was no immediate lighting in the area and no signs visible upon entry and parking. The driver did not see any signs and so was rather surprised to have received a PCN for the alleged contravention of "Unauthorised parking".

The sign showing "valid permit holders only": imgur.com/5K3yH1S
The driver was not displaying and did not have a valid permit.
Here is the PCN: imgur.com/8EAPzIx imgur.com/LJc0Ks6

The keeper's appeal to the PPC was rejected. The appeal used the forum template and did not reveal the driver. It was accompanied by a photo of the sign showing the poor lighting and the following wording (perhaps a bad idea):

The attached image shows your sign (the same one visible in your own photographic evidence) which is placed under unlit floodlights and above standing head height, meaning that it could not be seen by the driver.

The response to the photo (the rest of the response was standard waffle):

Included with the appeal was a photograph showing one of the terms and conditions signs. This photograph is not time and date stamped, therefore we do not know when this photograph was taken. However, the fact that the vehicle keeper took the photograph demonstrates that the sign was in the area. The photographs taken of the vehicle when the Parking Charge Notice was issued also show that the sign was around 5 metres away, on the drivers side. As both the photographs taken by the NPS parking warden and the vehicle keeper show that a sign was the area, this shows that the driver of the vehicle had the opportunity to read the sign, and then decide whether to remain parked or to leave the car park.

It is beyond 56 days since the windscreen PCN and no NtK has been received. Therefore the keeper plans to submit a POPLA appeal with the verbatim wording from the templates:

"NtK never served - no keeper liability"
forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=71287643&postcount=2345

"Operator has not shown who it is pursuing"
forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=71287626&postcount=2342

And also the template on signage, although does this need to be altered for this situation?
forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=71285691&postcount=2341

Has anything been missed? POPLA deadline is in a week, so there's still time for the NtK to arrive (although it will be late...). Will the appeal need to change if an NtK is received?

Coupon-mad

Good stuff, yes adapt the signage point, without saying who parked/was driving of course. You can embed extra photos into the main body of the appeal to illustrate what you are saying about 'the driver' not being given the chance to read the terms in the dark.

Always have the 'no landowner authority' as well.

HolyPigeon

The bulk of the signage template has been kept, since it still applies in this situation, and the following has been added:

The images below show the very poor lighting exhibited after nightfall. As the time of the alleged contravention occurred well after sunset (which was at xx:xx according to timeanddate.com/sun/uk/newcastle-upon-tyne?month=3&year=2017), the lack of light will have made the signs even less visible to the driver than they may have been during daylight hours.

Along with one photo taken by the keeper showing the appalling lighting in the area, and another showing the car and the nearest sign, also in appalling lighting, which was given in evidence by the PPC (the sign is not prominent, well lit, or visible to the driver from where the car is parked).

Does this sound good? Should any changes be made to the appeal if the NtK is received at this stage?

Thank You

Edit: On the rejection letter, the "payment to reach us before" dates are the same date for both full and reduced prices. In addition, the date is just days after the date of the rejection letter. Is this another point to add to the POPLA appeal?

Coupon-mad

On the rejection letter, the "payment to reach us before" dates are the same date for both full and reduced prices. In addition, the date is just days after the date of the rejection letter. Is this another point to add to the POPLA appeal?

I would mention that, yes, why not.

I like to throw the kitchen sink at these appeals, deliberately to frighten the idiots off.

Umkomaas

Have you complained to Halfords and asked them to intervene to get the parking charge cancelled? They have been pretty good at killing these in the past.

Go see the manager (not the till operator).

HolyPigeon

Update: NPS did not contest the POPLA appeal and therefore the charge need not be paid. Thank you for the help.

Coupon-mad

Great news! These firms do not like long and details POPLA appeals.

Umkomaas

Thanks for updating us - keeps regulars motivated to continue to advise against this scam.

You'd be surprised at the number of people who milk advice, sometimes complex and detailed, then can't be arsed to let us know the outcome of the advice.