POPLA unsuccessful

AIMINGHIGH123

Hello,
My POPLA descision was unsuccessful.

The real reason I couldn't pay for my ticket was because the machines I tried wouldn't take my card, had no cash on me and no phone to call the number. I didn't use this reason I used the information on this site when contesting it.

Popla descision was made 21 days after my appeal but it says I can appeal this to the ombudsman. Is that the next step or shall I just wait and go to court?
My other worry is I am potentially taking a job abroad at the end of next year, what would happen if I get a summons after leaving the country?

Also parking eye didn't even submit any information.

Here is there response:

DecisionUnsuccessful
Assessor Name
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that the operator has not complied with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012). The appellant advises that the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. He states that a contract was not entered into between the operator and the motorist. The appellant has also disputed the operator’s authority to issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) on the land.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The terms and conditions of the site state: “Parking Tariffs Apply. Up to 3 hours…£16.00. Failure to comply with the terms & conditions will result in a Parking Charge of: £100”. The operator has issued the PCN as the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session. Images from the operator’s Automatic Number Plate Recognition system have been provided, which show that the appellant’s vehicle entered the car park at 13:32 and exited at 15:34 on the day in question, staying for a total of two hours and one minutes. A copy of its whitelist payment lookup has also been provided, showing that the motorist did not make a payment to park at the site that day. The appellant’s case is that the operator has not complied with PoFA 2012. The appellant advises that the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. He states that a contract was not entered into between the operator and the motorist. When parking on private land, the motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage at the site sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. Therefore upon entry to the car park, it is the duty of the motorist to review and comply with the terms and conditions when deciding to park. In this case, it is not clear who the driver of the vehicle in question is, so I must consider the provisions of PoFA 2012 as the operator has issued the PCN to the keeper of the vehicle. The operator has provided a copy of the notice to keeper sent to the appellant. I have reviewed the notice to keeper against the relevant sections of the PoFA 2012 and I am satisfied that it is compliant, and that the operator has successfully transferred liability and is able to pursue the keeper of the vehicle. The appellant has disputed the operator’s authority to issue PCNs on the land. Section 7.1 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice outlines to operators, “If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you the authority to carry out all the aspects of car park management for the site that you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges”. The operator has provided a copy of its supply agreement with the landowner. Upon review of this, I am satisfied that the operator has sufficient authority to issue PCNs on the land in line with the British Parking Association Code of Practice’s requirements. Ultimately, it is a motorist’s responsibility to ensure they comply with the terms and conditions of a site when parking on it. As the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session, they have failed to adhere to the site’s terms and conditions. As such, I conclude that the PCN was issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal.

Umkomaas

Did you give us the early stage details of this PCN? I can find one previous thread for Euro Car Parks, but not ParkingEye.

You argued to POPLA that the NtK was not PoFA compliant. Why was it not compliant?

Are you also saying that PE did not provide you with their evidence pack, once you submitted your POPLA appeal, for you to rebut?

Ryandavis1959

As you admitted that you were the driver in post 1, why did you appeal to POPLA saying that you wasn’t the driver? Maybe POPLA smelled a rat and decided to find any old excuse to rule against you?

Umkomaas

Ryandavis1959 wrote: »

As you admitted that you were the driver in post 1, why did you appeal to POPLA saying that you wasn’t the driver? Maybe POPLA smelled a rat and decided to find any old excuse to rule against you?

POPLA can no more assume who the driver was than can the PPC. That’s why PoFA provides for the keeper to be pursued in the absence of the driver’s details. They can’t have two bites of the cherry. Surely you realise there is absolutely no legal obligation on the driver to ‘out’ him/herself, or for the keeper, even if known, for them to provide the driver’s details. Otherwise PoFA would have included that obligation.

No driver details provided - go down the PoFA route. Can’t comply with PoFA requirements, then no Keeper Liability. Go whistle.

So from which element of the laws of the land are you suggesting POPLA has the legal capacity to judge/assume who was driving? Elliott v Loake and CPS v AJH Films have regularly hit the dirt when PPCs have desperately tried to hoodwink the judges using them to argue who the driver was/might have been.

So which side precisely are you on? A bit of honesty?

claxtome

Suggest you edit your opening post to use the wording 'driver of the vehicle' as some PPCs search this forum's posts and use as evidence.

AIMINGHIGH123

No eurocarparks was a seperate case which I won.
In the eurocarparks case I did say I was the driver. In this case I did not mention myself as the driver.

I can't find my posts regarding PE but yes I am saying PE provided no evidence to POPLA. It even says on POPLA no evidence submitted.

Umkomaas

I am saying PE provided no evidence to POPLA. It even says on POPLA no evidence submitted.

If that’s the case, how come POPLA were quoting from their signage, their NtK and the landowner’s authority.

If you didn’t receive PE’s evidence pack (check your email spam folder), I would complain to John Gallagher, POPLA Lead Adjudicator to tell him that due process wasn’t followed, PE provided you with no evidence pack for you to understand and comment on their case.

AIMINGHIGH123

Ok I contacted POPLA via there enquiries email address, I could not find how to contact John Gallagher directly.
They have said that as the decision has been made they can't change it.
PE provided no evidence or it wasn't uploaded by POPLA. I have checked all of my emails, spam/junk everything but didn't receive any other email only the email that said a decision had been made.
I have been waiting for ages for them to get back to me and am very disappointed in the way this has been handled.
I guess the next stage is to complain to the ombudsman on the way this has been handled?

nosferatu1001

What ombudsmen?

No, you complain again, FAO John Gallagher
Clear procedural error. You were not given an opporutnity to comment on the operators evidence, through fault of OPLA.

Coupon-mad

You should have had an email from POPLA a while back, telling you the operator's evidence was available for viewing (they do not have to provide a case summary, which is like it sounds, an optional 'summary').

PE provide 40 - 50 pages of 'evidence pack' normally, and when you got the POPLA email giving you seven days to comment on the evidence, you should have been able to see that linked on the portal when you logged into POPLA (again, never mind the case summary, forget that). Edna Basher describes the process here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/73561308#Comment_73561308


Are you saying that no evidence pack was visible at all? If so, that's your complaint, don't talk about lack of case summary.

Finally, why did your appeal talk about no keeper liability? Only relevant if it was a Golden Ticket (non POFA version).

AIMINGHIGH123

Ok further update regarding my parking charge.

I attempted to contact POPLA twice regarding my case but the they haven’t responded or acknowledged my emails.

I have now received a letter from parkingeye.
It’s a letter before county court claim.
It states they are aware my appeal to popla has been unsuccessful and have 28 dats to pay £100 or will be taken to court.
Do I continue to fight or just pay the charge?