Notice to Keeper from ParkingEye received 140 days after alleged incidents

Drew_P

Not sure if I'm being an idiot but when I search for POPLA REBUTTALS I just get posts says "search for POPLA REBUTTALS" and not actually any rebuttals!

How would the following be as a rebuttal?...

Dear Sir.

Please see below my comments on the evidence supplied by ParkingEye in relation to the points made in my appeal:-

1. The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
Parking Eye’s evidence states “this Parking Charge was not issued under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012” which is confirmation they are not using POFA2012 and have therefore failed to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper. I am the registered keeper of the vehicle, I was not the driver, so I am not liable for this charge.

2. The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge.
ParkingEye have supplied no evidence as to who the driver was on the date in question.

3. The operator failed to adhere to the British Parking Associations (BPA) Code of Practice Grace Periods.
ParkingEye’s evidence confirms 1 hour of parking was purchased, that there is a grace period to arrive and park, a grace period to leave (in line with the BPA Code of Practice, section 13) and that “All grace periods in place are a minimum of 10 minutes or more”. Therefore, a total minimum grace period to arrive, park and leave the Car Park of 20 minutes can be assumed. ParkingEye’s evidence states that the time in the Car Park was 1 hour 17 minutes which confirms that the 17 minutes to arrive and leave the Car Park is within the grace period allowed.

4. ParkingEye Ltd lacks proprietary interest in the land and does not have the capacity to offer contracts or to bring a claim for trespass.
ParkingEye have supplied a witness statement by way of evidence that they had authority to issue and pursue Parking Charges on the date in question. As stated in my initial appeal “Documentary evidence must pre-date the parking event in question and be in the form of genuine copy of the actual site agreement/contract with the landowner/occupier and not just a signed ‘witness statement’ slip of paper saying it exists”. ParkingEye have failed to submit satisfactory evidence to prove they had authority to issue Parking Charges.

5. Signage does not comply with the BPA Code of Practice and was not prominent enough to form any contract with a driver.

1. ParkingEye’s evidence includes photos of parking signs from both ParkingEye and Euro Car Parks Ltd that are displayed above and below each other on the same signage pole (see Section F, pages 25 and 27 of ParkingEye’s evidence). This backs up my assertion that the signage in this Car Park is unclear, confusing and insufficient.
2. The terms and conditions on all of the signs included in ParkingEye’s evidence is in such a small font it cannot be read. This backs up my assertion that the signage in this Car Park does not comply with the BPA Code of Practice and are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces to form any contract with a driver.
3. ParkingEye have included a photo of a movable, non-fixed sign displayed in the reception area of XXXX (see Section F, page 42 of ParkingEye’s evidence). There is no evidence this sign was on display on the day of the alleged parking offence.

Taking the above points into consideration, I respectfully request the appeal to be upheld.

Yours faithfully,

Redx

it may be that my search words need altering or variations used, but there are rebuttals on this forum from this year, some good ones

however, your rebuttal above is an excellent example of what and how it should be and looks good to me , but wait for other comments if time allows before emailing to popla (or however they want it sent)

edit

PARKING EYE POPLA REBUTTAL works for me (using show threads)

like this recent one https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5691633

Umkomaas

Your rebuttals appear to be against the headers of your original POPLA appeal. Be careful that POPLA don’t think this is just additional/new evidence, or that you are just re-emphasising your points, not dealing directly with PE evidence?

Do PE not have their own evidence pack headers? If so I’d be commenting against those, or have they just used your original headers and slung their own evidence below them?

Drew_P

SUCCESS!!! POPLA upheld my appeal!

Thank you to...

Umkomaas
Redx
The Deep
nosferatu1001
DoaM

...for your comments and help, I very much appreciate your assistance with this and in helping me put together my appeal.

I just have two more questions which relate to the second parking charge ParkingEye issued... I had originally appealed the two parking charges on the same letter. The appeal for the second parking charge was ignored by ParkingEye but I was able to appeal online and they sent me a letter saying the charge was on hold for 28 days to enable me to name the driver. They say if I do not give them the evidence they have asked for my appeal may well be rejected and a POPLA code provided. My questions are:-

1. I'm obviously not going to name the driver but I assume I just ignore this letter and wait for my POPLA code?
2. When I receive my POPLA code should I mention my successful appeal in my evidence to POPLA as the circumstances are effectively the same for both incidents.

Thanks in advance for any views and assistance and thanks again to all that have posted so far on this thread.

Redx

well done on your win

yes is the simple answer

same popla appeal, same rebuttals , its already been done

just await the rejection and popla code and do the same again and add your case number from this successful appeal , so the assessor can easily find it

this assumes that they dont pull out at some point , like before or after the popla appeal is made. they may decide to not contest your next popla appeal

but if they take it to the wire like this one, you now have simple copy and paste reactions and replies etc

again, well done and thanks for taking the advice you were given onboard

more foo PE for flogging a dead horse that they must know was extremely dead (like a dead parrot I used to watch on tv)