ParkingEye LBCCC - sent to my old address

Coupon-mad

I would just make it clear PE admitted it:

This is evidenced in the evidence pack provided by Parking Eye Ltd, where even they admit this is a non-POFA PCN that cannot hold a keeper liable

And at the end I would mention who else is being copied in, to focus their minds on this AWFUL decision, and to warn that if you suffer loss by paying this, you assert that POPLA are liable:

You will notice that I am copying in Mr Dunford of the DVLA and Mr Clark of the BPA, because this woeful error is wholly unacceptable from a professional customer-facing service. I am aware that ISPA no longer exists since the BPA closed it, so one wonders who will fairly oversee POPLA and ensure action is taken to put right such terrible decisions, if not the BPA and DVLA themselves? At the very least, I require an urgent apology from POPLA and a letter from Mr Gallagher that I can use in court in my defence, should ParkingEye not cancel this PCN, given the unavoidable fact that POPLA has erred and not properly considered the PCN evidence.

This is a formal complaint for the personal attention of the Lead Adjudicator; I realise POPLA is a busy service but kindly do not pass this complaint to another Assessor using a template 'sorry, we've made our decision' reply, asserting wrongly that the first Assessor was in any way 'entitled' to conclude the PCN was POFA compliant (it's not even a grey area!).

Take formal note that should I suffer financial loss and/or the distress of court as a result of POPLA not following the correct procedure/failing to train Assessors properly in recognising this non-POFA PCN, I will hold POPLA liable, and will reserve my rights to sue to recover any loss and/or damages for distress, in this case directly caused by POPLA.

e231

Thank you for the excellent wording and appropriate points to make! I thought I would put my final email here before I send it...

Subject: Complaint about the POPLA process and service plus unsatisfactory handling of the case

For the personal attention of Mr John Gallagher, Lead Adjudicator

Dear Mr Gallagher,

I write to you with reference to a Parking Charge Notification (PCN) that I received as the registered keeper from Parking Eye Ltd., against which I used the POPLA service to raise an appeal.

As stated above, I wish to kindly but strongly complain about the resultant POPLA process and service as well as the unsatisfactory handling of the case. This matter has generated much stress and frustration for me and I hope that you will understand.

I assert that the subsequent assessor of this has made an error in very basic terms with reference to liability. The assessor has stated in their judgement of this case:

“I am satisfied that the operator has provided a Notice to Keeper that is compliant with PoFA 2012”

However, I am advised and I assert that they were not entitled to make that finding. As you will see in the attached scan of the PCN that was served to me, the PCN is a non-POFA one. This is evidenced in the evidence pack provided by Parking Eye Ltd - where even they admit this is a non-POFA PCN that cannot hold a keeper liable. This was also clearly stated in the appeal, and even pointed out in the comments given on the evidence.

As a result, I very strongly request that the decision is officially reversed, and/or, that an apology is issued to the effect that an error has been made, resulting in an incorrect decision. I would also be reasonable to request that the assessor has had the difference in POFA wording explained to him/her, to prevent this happening again and to stop other registered keepers receiving a blatantly incorrect judgement and decision on liability for a 2-and-a-half-month old non-POFA postal PCN.

Could I please point out that I am copying in Mr Dunford of the DVLA and Mr Clark of the BPA, because I need to bring this matter to their kind attention. I believe that this basic error is really unacceptable from a professional customer-facing service. It causes great anguish for the honest motorist. I am also aware that ISPA no longer exists since being closed by the BPA. I therefore implore the BPA and the DVLA to fairly oversee POPLA to ensure that corrective action is taken to put right processes that lead to such unjust decisions. At the very least, as requested, I need an urgent apology from POPLA and a letter from Mr Gallagher that I can use in court in my defence, should Parking Eye not cancel this PCN, despite the unavoidable fact that POPLA has erred and not properly considered the PCN evidence.

I kindly advise you that this is a formal complaint for the personal attention of Mr Gallagher, Lead Adjudicator; I realise POPLA is a busy service but trust you will see that my argument is correct and that you can resolve this basic error - please do not pass this complaint to another Assessor using a template “sorry, we've made our decision” reply, asserting wrongly that the first Assessor was in any way 'entitled' to conclude the PCN was POFA compliant.

I finally believe that you will see that an unfortunate error has been made, sense will prevail and you will reverse the decision as requested, but I hope you will understand that should I suffer financial loss and/or the distress of court as a result of POPLA not following the correct procedure and/or failing to train Assessors properly in recognising this non-POFA PCN, I would have no option but to hold POPLA liable, and will reserve my rights to legally recover any loss and/or damages for distress, in this case directly caused by POPLA.

I trust and hope that you will be able to help close this matter and see that my comments are reasonable and fair. For that I thank you all in kind anticipation.

Yours sincerely,

xxx

POPLA REF: XXX

Umkomaas

I’d take out the ‘kindlys’ and ‘strongly requests’ to make this more assertive. Otherwise looks fine.

Coupon-mad

...I hope that you will understand.

He won't - not unless you spell it out - so don't word it weakly. It has become far too long, and diluted the complaint.

''Could I please point out''

...is not the way I suggested this should be written. A FORMAL complaint needs to read slightly narkily, IMHO.

KeithP

I hope you don't mind me adjusting that a little:

Subject: Complaint about the POPLA process and service plus unsatisfactory handling of the case

For the personal attention of Mr John Gallagher, Lead Adjudicator

Dear Mr Gallagher,

I write to you with reference to a Parking Charge Notification (PCN) that I received as the registered keeper from Parking Eye Ltd., against which I used the POPLA service to raise an appeal - POPLA reference: nnn.

I wish to complain about the resultant POPLA process and service as well as the unsatisfactory handling of the case. This matter has generated much stress and frustration for me.

I assert that the subsequent assessor of this has made an error in very basic terms with reference to liability. The assessor has stated in their judgement of this case:

“I am satisfied that the operator has provided a Notice to Keeper that is compliant with PoFA 2012”

However, I am advised and I assert that they were not entitled to make that finding. As you will see in the attached scan of the PCN that was served to me, the PCN is a non-POFA one. This is evidenced in the evidence pack provided by Parking Eye Ltd - where even they admit this is a non-POFA PCN that cannot hold a keeper liable. This was also clearly stated in the appeal, and even pointed out in the comments given on the evidence.

As a result, I expect the decision to be reversed, and/or, that an apology is issued to the effect that an error has been made, resulting in an incorrect decision. I would also be reasonable to request that the assessor has had the difference in POFA wording explained to him/her, to prevent this happening again and to stop other registered keepers receiving a blatantly incorrect judgement and decision on liability for a 2-and-a-half-month old non-POFA postal PCN.

You need to know that I am copying in Mr Dunford of the DVLA and Mr Clark of the BPA, because this basic error is really unacceptable. I am also aware that ISPA no longer exists since being closed by the BPA. I therefore implore the BPA and the DVLA to fairly oversee POPLA to ensure that corrective action is taken to put right processes that lead to such unjust decisions. At the very least, as requested, I need an urgent apology from POPLA and a letter from Mr Gallagher that I can use in court in my defence, should Parking Eye not cancel this PCN, despite the unavoidable fact that POPLA has erred and not properly considered the PCN evidence.

You are advised that this is a formal complaint for the personal attention of Mr Gallagher, Lead Adjudicator; I realise POPLA is a busy service but trust you will see that my argument is correct and that you can resolve this basic error - please do not pass this complaint to another Assessor using a template “sorry, we've made our decision” reply, asserting wrongly that the first Assessor was in any way 'entitled' to conclude the PCN was POFA compliant.

I finally believe that you will see that an unfortunate error has been made, sense will prevail and you will reverse the decision as requested, but I am sure you will understand that should I suffer financial loss and/or the distress of court as a result of POPLA not following the correct procedure and/or failing to train Assessors properly in recognising this non-POFA PCN, I would have no option but to hold POPLA liable, and will reserve my rights to legally recover any loss and/or damages for distress, in this case directly caused by POPLA.

I look forward to a favourable response.

Yours faithfully,

xxx

Hmmm... still looks a bit too long.

Umkomaas

At the very least, [STRIKE]as requested[/STRIKE], I need an urgent apology from POPLA and a letter from Mr Gallagher that I can use in court in my defence, should Parking Eye (who, as you will be aware, are serial litigators against naive and vulnerable motorists) not cancel this PCN, despite the unavoidable fact that POPLA has erred and not properly considered the PCN evidence.

You are advised that this is a formal complaint for the personal attention of Mr Gallagher, Lead Adjudicator; [STRIKE]I realise POPLA is a busy service but trust you will see that my argument is correct and that you can resolve this basic error but - [/STRIKE] please do not pass this complaint to another Assessor using a template “sorry, we've made our decision” reply, asserting wrongly that the first Assessor was in any way 'entitled' to conclude the PCN was POFA compliant.

[STRIKE]I finally believe that you will see that an unfortunate [/STRIKE] Finally, it is clear that a fundamental error has been made, [STRIKE]sense will prevail[/STRIKE] and you will reverse the decision [STRIKE]as requested[/STRIKE], [STRIKE]but I am sure you will understand[/STRIKE] please be aware, that should I suffer financial loss and/or the distress [STRIKE]of[/STRIKE] through the court as a result of POPLA not following the correct procedure and/or failing to train Assessors properly in recognising this non-POFA PCN, I would have no option but to hold POPLA liable, and will reserve my rights to legally recover any loss and/or damages for distress, in this case directly caused by POPLA.

Please be aware that should this proceed to court, I reserve the right to call the Adjudicator to the court for cross examination, and now this issue has been brought to the attention of Mr Gallagher, to additionally call him too as a Witness.

You are still being far too polite. Toughen up, buddy.

e231

Good evening all, I hope you are all well and beginning to enjoy the wind up to Christmas! :rudolf:

I thought I would post an update to this following the emailing of the complaint (of which I took all your input onboard - thanks again!), and spoiler alert - it is not great

In a nutshell, they are saying the PCN was issued correct and requirements of PoFA were met, and that it is my fault for not updating the DVLA.

This is WRONG and UNFAIR. The parking event happened on 28/06/17, and I am aware that the initial PCN was issued on 06/07/17. I took ownership of my new house on 30/06/17 and I subsequently moved in the day after on 01/07/17 - this was a Saturday. On the Monday, 03/07/17, as the registered keeper I sent off my V5 with the update of address details to the DVLA. As you can see, I did this ASAP as it is against the law to not do so, and also I think I did this pretty quickly!

It is very very unfortunate, that PE have obtained the address details in the period of time before the DVLA managed to update their details. I accept this isn't their fault, but similarly this is also not my fault either!

Anyway, enough of my ramblings, here is the reply:

Dear Mr,
Your complaint about POPLA

Thank you for your email dated 18 December 2017, which was passed to me by John Gallagher, as I am responsible for responding to complaints.

You confirm that you are the registered keeper of the vehicle with registration XXX. On 28 June 2017, Parking Eye’s Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras observed the vehicle entering the car park at Taylor’s Bakery, Leigh, at 18:01, and exiting at 18:20.

The terms and conditions of the car park, which I am satisfied where sufficiently clear on the signage, required drivers to enter their full and correct vehicle registration if they wanted to park. The vehicle with registration XXX was not registered and as such, the driver breached the terms and conditions of the car park.

As ParkingEye was unaware of the driver, it sought keeper details from the DVLA so it could follow the process set out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012). As you highlight, a parking operator can only seek to pursue a keeper if the conditions of PoFA 2012 are met. You also point out that PoFA 2012 sets out a strict timeline, as below:


The notice must be given by:
(a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.

“The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended’’

PoFA 2012 also sets out:


(6)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.
ParkingEye posted the Notice to Keeper, to the address held by the DVLA, on 6 July 2017. As it has not been proven to the contrary, PoFA 2012 presumes that the Notice to Keeper was ‘given’ on 11 July 2017. This was within 14 days of the parking event.

As ParkingEye opted to give the notice by post, it needed to post it to a current address for service for the keeper. ParkingEye posted the notice to the address for service held for you, as the keeper of the vehicle, by the DVLA. I accept that you had moved away from the address. However, my strict interpretation is that by sending the Notice to Keeper to the address held by the DVLA within 14 days – ParkingEye met the requirements of PoFA 2012.

ParkingEye is not responsible that you did not update the DVLA with your new address in sufficient time.

As the Notice to Keeper issued by ParkingEye met the requirements of PoFA 2012, liability for the parking charge transferred to you as the keeper, on 9 August 2017. ParkingEye wrote to confirm (at the only address it knew for you) and continued to pursue payment at that address. It was not until your former landlord wrote to ParkingEye to confirm your new address that it was able to write to you at your new address.

You are correct that when ParkingEye wrote to you at your new address, the communication was not a PoFA 2012 compliant Notice to Keeper. ParkingEye confirms the same. But it did not need to be. ParkingEye had already transferred liability to you as keeper by following the correct process.

I am satisfied with the assessor’s decision. She explained “The operator has provided a copy of the Notice to Keeper sent to the appellant on the 06 July 2017, this was posted to the address held by the DVLA. The operator received communication on 03 September 2017 to say that the appellant no longer lived at the address. A new notice was sent to the address provided, I am satisfied that the operator has provided a Notice to Keeper that is compliant with PoFA 2012. It is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that the address held by the DVLA is kept up to date”. This is consistent with my view of the case.

This was an uncommon situation, so prior to issuing her decision, the assessor sought case advice from Operation Team Manager, Christian Morgan. Both he and the assessor agreed that the operator issued the first Notice to Keeper correctly using PoFA 2012, based on the information held by the DVLA.

As POPLA is a one-stage process, there is no opportunity for you to appeal the decision. As our involvement in your appeal has now concluded you may wish to pursue matters further. For independent legal advice, please contact Citizens Advice at:!https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk!or call 0345 404 05 06 (English) or 0345 404 0505 (Welsh).

In closing, I am sorry that your experience of using our service has not been positive. However, we have reached the end of our process and my response now concludes our complaints procedure.

I trust you will appreciate that there will be no further review of your appeal and it will not be appropriate for us to respond to any further correspondence on this matter.



Kind regards,


Emily Chriscoli

POPLA Complaints

:mad:

I really look forward to hearing what you all think! As always, many many thanks!:beer:

Coupon-mad

Dear POPLA,

Thank you for at least admitting that the (new, inexperienced?) Assessor was unsure. As I suspected.

Clearly, despite the discussion as POPLA couldn't make your minds up, the wrong call was made in this instance, yet again to the detriment of the consumer and in favour of the largest parking firm in the BPA, namely ParkingEye, who are the movers and shakers of your paymasters.

You appear to have missed the fact that ParkingEye stated that they were not seeking keeper liability, so POPLA is not entitled to look for it for the operator, especially when all parties agreed that the first PCN was not received at all.

POPLA is an evidence-based service, and has no entitlement to look for reasons to find a keeper liable, where the parking firm did not rely upon any evidence of such liability. Parking Eye must have winged it and hoped that POPLA (paid for by the BPA members, and now with no ISPA overseeing your 'decisions') would decide this one as you did.

POPLA knows as fact the first PCN was never delivered to me as keeper, and that ParkingEye replaced it, yet by your reasoning, they didn't even have to bother and could have relied upon the unseen one all along. That is atrocious decision-making from an 'independent' service.

It seems to those who follow such cases that POPLA are giving an impression of now being neck and neck with the IAS in recent months, in the well-known race to the bottom. It started when London Councils (who used legally-trained Assessors and understood the law) lost the POPLA contract because your service run it more cheaply, as if that's a good thing. But in recent months POPLA decisions from your service have started to reach a new low.

It is also woeful to note that Mr Gallagher himself almost never replies to formal complaints.

Complaints like mine are merely passed to another Assessor such as yourself, and forgive me for the observation that you/the 'POPLA Complaints Department' appear to be taught to use a template form of words to blind the public with quotes from the POFA (not needed, thankyou) and wave the original decisions through in all recent cases seen in the public domain.

Every decision is a template, not individually worded, and your response was similar, and comes across as an attempt to stop me from complaining. I will not.

A copy of this complaint email trail will be sent to my MP.

regards,

e231

Thank you Coupon-Mad for taking the time to write that, it is much appreciated!

I'll send that off, let's see if they have the decency to reply! I shall also take your advice to send the trail to my MP.

Do you suggest that I pay the charge and accept defeat, (albeit not letting it drop and sending to MP), or should I hold off until PE start sending letters, and tell them that I do not accept the outcome?

Also, despite there being no opportunity to appeal again, and also the fact that this shouldn't factor in, should I explain that I do not agree with the comment of "It is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that the address held by the DVLA is kept up to date”. This is consistent with my view of the case." owing to the fact that as the registered keeper, I DID update the DVLA with the address change as soon as the address change happened!!

Thank you so much for all your help, I really am so grateful for your assistance with this!

nosferatu1001

Wait. Don’t jump the gun.
Yes, that statement wa their template. You DID keep it up to date.