Britannia PCN Appeal

GSHopper

Sadly I did not read the Newbies Thread before sending in my appeal to Britannia - they have rejected it and know that I was the driver. Am I sunk?

Coupon-mad

Doubt it, this is only Britannia who are pretty useless at POPLA.

Show us your POPLA draft. Loads of people win as 'driver' having made the same mistake as you.

GSHopper

Having read some of the other posts, it is advised not to mention mitigating circumstances. I used that as my first appeal to Britannia - would POPLA use that against me?

waamo

No. Naming the driver is not fatal to an appeal nor are your initial appeal points. A POPLA appeal can differ greatly from an initial appeal and still win.

GSHopper

I've drafted a POPLA appeal, and as far as I can see the point about Landowner Authority seems to be the only one relevant as I had a look at the signage in the car park (Southampton Retail) and they are fairly clear and legible.

"POPLA Appeal


I am writing to you to lodge a formal appeal against a parking charge notice issued to the vehicle in question. I contend that I am not liable for this parking charge on the basis of the below points:

No evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice

As this operator does not have proprietary interest in the land then I require that they produce an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner. The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including exemptions - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do and any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed, generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.

Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in the BPA CoP) and basic information such as the land boundary and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to charge (which cannot be assumed to be the sum in small print on a sign because template private parking terms and sums have been known not to match the actual landowner agreement).

Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:

7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.

7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:

a the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined

b any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation

c any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement

d who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs

e the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement"

nosferatu1001

Really? They have the charge in massive lettering similar to the Beavis case?

GSHopper

No not massive - so I can include the signage paragraphs. .......

Coupon-mad

Obviously. That's what I wrote it for! No-one misses out criticising the signs, no idea why you thought 'having signs up' was a reason not to point out the writing is tiny and the charge buried in small print!

What was the alleged contravention?

If it was alleged overstay at Waitrose for example, I've seen a laughable set of photos from Britannia, where both photos were taken at the end, none at the start of parking...so there was NO evidence of any overstay at all. How we laughed (and of course, the friend won at POPLA with my help, and there were no signs up but that's another story).

GSHopper

It was an overstay - the parking ticket was for an hour and the PCN was issued 17 mins after. The parking ticket did show the time the ticket was purchased.

Coupon-mad

In fact I would throw in 'no keeper liability' anyway and explain the NTK was non-POFA (if they issued any NTK at all) even if you appealed as driver. Chuck it all at Britannia anyway, and the usual template about the 'individual appellant' as point #2. Then landowner authority, then signage (4 appeal points, all templates already written).

Let Britannia prove you said who was driving, let them prove their case.

GSHopper

Sorry to be thick, but where's the template about "individual appellant"? Is it the one about the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing....?