Anxiety, Exams and Parking tickets! Please Help!

Coupon-mad

http://s38.photobucket.com/user/lara9336/library/

I was just wondering if the fact that my car does not have a time stamp on the incoming and outcoming pictures from the car park would also be of use to say?

Yes, add that comment as well, to the wording I already gave you above, and email POPLA with all of it as comments on the evidence, re the one that is in at POPLA.

I do have the landlords email address is there anything I can request or say to him or will the points in the response above be enough?

IMHO you should win this at POPLA but you do need to get some robust comments in to focus POPLA on the fact that the touchscreen isn't mentioned on the sign and the stock image is an old photo, and there is nothing to show the terms on the touchscreen or the terms on any sign adjacent to the car.

You should send a complaint to the landlord to see if he will stop this harassment.

I have only sent an email in regards to the other 2 but it was exactly the same as the first one so i guess it will be rejected as well but their reply comes in the post within 28 days after sending the email so they have not come yet.

So you are awaiting POPLA codes for those two? When they arrive, write a stronger POPLA appeal this time, incorporating the usual stuff from post #3 of the NEWBIES thread about landowner authority and dodgy signs, as well as the points we've discussed above about the sign not mentioning staff or the touchscreen or any terms about what constitutes a person parking with permission.

I assume in all 3 appeals you made the mistake of saying you were the driver? It would have been soooo much easier to be 100% sure of a win at POPLA, if you had not! CEL had no idea who was driving , they sent PCNs to you as keeper and you should always appeal in that mode (not as driver) to any private PCN.

Lara9336

So I have just had another PCN come through the post.

The PCN looks exactly the same as the other with just pics of my car entering and leaving the car park. I am going to write my appeal to CEL at this stage. Obviously now I know not to say that I was the driver so whats the best way to go about it without saying it was me?

Coupon-mad

As per the NEWBIES thread. Thought you would know that by now!

Lara9336

Just to clarify so far I have 4 PCNS (Will letter them A,B,C,D)
PCN A, B and C CEL appeal- I admitted 'My placement began on the 12/06/2017 and ended on the 21/06/2017 and between these dates I was using the car park without registering my car.'

PCN A: I appealed to POPLA, CEL gave their defence to which I responsed using the online system limited to 2000 characters:
'If there is an exemption from charge for Pharmacy staff,CEL must ensure this is communicated either by themselves through prominent signs which mention terms & conditions for staff, or by the Pharmacy having clear instructions to accompany the touchscreen, which forms part of the alleged contract and parking regime itself.No photos of the touchscreen, or instructions on the touchscreen, or staff directives or instructions issued (if any) have been supplied by CEL.The operator can't issue an touchscreen with no instructions (no evidence has been shown in this regard) and assume it is reasonable for no-one - neither them or the Pharmacy - to inform staff members of the terms and the steps to take to exempt themselves, every day rather than by the normally used 'white list' route of registering a retail staff car just once, as an exempt vehicle.Any employer will have turnover of staff working there so it is incumbent upon CEL to show the touchscreen has relevant instructions to form part of the contract.The signage is silent about staff exemption instructions or how one gets this vague 'permit',or that a person has an obligation to use equipment such as a touchscreen.Nor does the sign in any way create any 'relevant obligation' to do anything, to prove a driver is a 'permit holder'.As a staff member, I undoubtedly had permission to park, so was by definition a 'permit holder'. A staff member with permission to park, who reasonably believed they had white-listed their car, cannot have breached terms that do not exist, as drafted, under any reasonable interpretation.The sign pictured does not comply with the BPA CoP on entrance signs-it fails to tell the driver that it is private land managed by a BPA AOS member as there is no roundel and the 'P' is not the one required by the CoP,mandatory for signage since 2014. Images attached of the car do not show evidence of the time of entry and exit and there is no evidence as to the position of the car in relation to the sign.'


POPLA rejection:
"The operator has provided photographic evidence of the terms and conditions, as displayed at the site, which states, “Permit Holders Only; If you breach any of the terms you will be charged £100”. The operator has provided images from the Automatic Number Plate Recognition system, which shows the appellant’s vehicle, XXXXXXX, entered the site on 13 June 2017 at 09:29 and exited the site at 12:41. The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as the appellant failed to obtain an electronic permit. The appellant’s case is that they were on summer placement at Lloyds Pharmacy. The appellant states they were told that they could park in the car park. The appellant states they needed to register their vehicle on the first day, but did not realise that they needed to do this every day. The appellant states they spoke to the manager who advised there must have been a fault with the system. The appellant has provided evidence of their placement. I acknowledge the appellant’s comments, however when looking at appeals, POPLA considers whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract. POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. The operator has provided a copy of the system print out. This is an online transaction record showing a search for the appellant’s vehicle. From this, I can see that the appellant’s vehicle was not registered against a permit. I note the appellant’s comments stating that their manager states the machine must have been faulty, however if this was the case the appellant should have contacted the operator in order to raise a concern. Ultimately, it is the motorist’s responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions of the car park. Upon consideration of the evidence, the appellant failed to obtain an electronic permit, and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the car park. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal."


I am confused to why they didnt discuss any of the above points I raised?


PCN B I have been sent a POPLA code so will be using the points above again in the initial part of the appeal.

If I stated I was using the car park between those dates in my CEL appeal is it worth saying that I dont want to state the driver on that particular date in the POPLA appeal?

PCN C Waiting for a POPLA code even though I appealed PCN B and C in the same email....


PCN D I have sent an appeal to CEL:
Dear Sir or Madam,

Re. PCN D
I am writing to you as the registered keeper of the vehicle XXXX XXX

The issued notice to keeper states, "It is the driver's responsibility to pay this PCN", but you have neither named the driver nor produced any evidence as to the identity of the driver at the time of the incident. As the keeper of the vehicle, I am exercising my right not to name the driver. There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be made.

Furthermore, the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Paragraph 9(5) stipulates that for keeper liability to apply, the keeper must receive a notice to keeper within 14 days of the incident. Your PCN states the incident date as 21st June 2017 and shows an issue date of 17th July 2017. According to my calculations, to comply with POFA 2012 any notice to keeper should have arrived no later than 5th July 2017 and therefore as keeper I cannot be held liable.

I thereby respectfully request that you cancel the charge. Should you reject my appeal, please supply a POPLA code.

Yours faithfully,
My name

I found this email template on the forum and it has been accepted with CEL previously so hoping it will be accepted this time.

Lara9336

In regard to complaining to the landowner shall I just state what I said in the popla appeal and complain about harassment? Is there anything I can say that in regard to taking further action against them for the distress caused to get them to tell CEL to back off?

Coupon-mad

Yes, tell them that they are using a firm of ex-clampers who are very litigious, and it is wholly unreasonable to allow a contractor to sue employees of the pharmacy, when nothing on the signs describes how permits are to be obtained (once a week, every day, or just one exemption white list entry - which is what you thought).

I am confused to why they didnt discuss any of the above points I raised?

Me too. Email the complaints@ POPLA email address shown in their FAQS, and ask why the Assessor failed to read your comments and how they concluded that signs that do not mention how to 'display' a permit, nor anything about electronic permits at all, nor even displaying anything, can create a contract? A 'permit holder' is a person who holds permission to park, and nothing states on the signs that people with such permission have any 'relevant obligation' to do anything with that permission.

Why has the Assessor ignored the comments?

PCN B I have been sent a POPLA code so will be using the points above again in the initial part of the appeal.

OK but show us the POPLA draft first.

If I stated I was using the car park between those dates in my CEL appeal is it worth saying that I dont want to state the driver on that particular date in the POPLA appeal?

Not if THAT appeal admitted you were driving. Did THAT appeal admit the driver, or was that the one where you used our template?

Lara9336

The good, the bad and the ugly!!

Lets start with the good news:
I contacted the landlord and after pointing out the same arguments about signage, not being told about the how to get the permit etc they have agreed to get 3 of the PCNs cancelled (B,C,D - the three that I had only appealed to CEL about and not yet sent my appeal to POPLA to)

The Bad
They said that they could not get the first one cancelled the one which was rejected by POPLA and told me that I would be better off paying it.

The ugly:
After my initial email to the landlord I got this response:

"I assume your former colleagues have not received parking notices and with the touch screen equipment located within the store it would be reasonable to expect they are fully aware of the parking procedure, if they are not I am very happy to send them another instruction letter. The transmission of these instructions regarding parking is an internal issue, Lloyds have a set number of spaces allowed within the lease and so the presence of your vehicle may in fact mean Lloyds were in breach of the terms of the lease rather than you having "undoubtedly permission to park".

Our site manager is going to contact your former manager today to discuss the issue and I will revert back to you after these discussions."

Then I got this from the site manager:

"We have spoken to your former manger at Lloyds who advises you were aware of the parking procedure and were remind on several occasions to input your information into the system, with the simple truth of the matter being that you forgot to take the 30 seconds needed to input your information onto the system located within the unit. I therefore have very little sympathy for your current circumstance.

That being said the parking operator have been extremely generous as a gesture of goodwill and agreed cancel tickets:- PCN B,C,D

They are unable to cancel:- PCN A

My advice would be to pay this ASAP as a gesture of your goodwill and relieve all of your stress and anxiety! "

I am really frustrated/angry at the second response and the fact that my manager lied about reminding me to put in my car details to register for a permit. I have a previous phone call recording where I said about not knowing about the daily permit system to my manager and he didnt say anything about me being told/reminded I had to. The reason I recorded the phone call was because I didnt trust my manager which I now really happy I did as he's gone and told a complete lie. It doesnt make any sense that my car was registered on the first day and then the last few days (after I got a PCN and found out about the system) and not once in between. If i was being constantly reminded surely I would have registered it most days throughout the placement not just on the first day then at the end!!! I also dont understand what they got out of lying and making me look bad rather than just saying it was miscommunication and I wasnt told!!!

Next action:
Phone up pharmacy manager and get them to admit to the lie and record the conversation. Then report to lloyds pharmacy head office/sue them/take some sort of action against them because I am really annoyed!!
Reply to the car park landlord tell them the truth and that I have evidence and ask them to get the final parking ticket sorted if possible.

I also emailed POPLA about their rejection of this parking ticket without considering what I said and Im waiting for their response.

Sorry if this is really long just wanted to explain whats happened now and ask is what I am doing the correct thing? Is there anything else I could do?

Coupon-mad

Sounds good. Make sure you get the confirmation that the 3 PCNs are cancelled.

Ignore the other one until you need to defend a claim, because CEL give up quite easily thus far when their useless chancer claims are defended well.

nosferatu1001

If the other party isn't aware of the call being reviewed, then afaik you cannot use or disclose the recording - you can only make a transcript of it.