pcn to registered keeper

Fruitcake

I've only skim read this, but you still haven't said you were not the driver, you were not even present in the car park or in the vehicle at the time of the alleged event.
The comments about the vehicle being in the car ark on a previous occasion are irrelevant and misleading.
You haven't mentioned that the alleged contract appears to have been amended after the date it was produced as there is no contemporary dated signature.

Pdmum

[FONT=&quot]The operator states they have provided a log that the Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior to the date of the contravention and therefore the driver had sufficient opportunity to be aware of the terms and conditions.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
I the Appellant was not in the vehicle on either the date of the alleged contravention or the day prior.
Evidence relating to the day prior to the alleged contravention is both irrelevant and misleading.

Does that sound better. Not sure what you mean about the dates in contract?
The typed date on the contract is tbc but has been crossed out and handwritten, as are other dates .
Is this a common error?
[/FONT]

Fruitcake

Pdmum wrote: »

[FONT=&quot]The operator states they have provided a log that the Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior to the date of the contravention and therefore the driver had sufficient opportunity to be aware of the terms and conditions.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
I the Appellant was not in the vehicle on either the date of the alleged contravention or the day prior.
Evidence relating to the day prior to the alleged contravention is both irrelevant and misleading.

Does that sound better. Not sure what you mean about the dates in contract?
The typed date on the contract is tbc but has been crossed out and handwritten, as are other dates .
Is this a common error?
[/FONT]

That's precisely what I mean. I would put the scammers to strict proof that the original contract is not undated and then amended recently. I would want to see the original un-redacted contract with dates and contemporary signatures.
I would expect a proper contract to have everything including dates typed up, or any amendments signed or initialled and witnessed. I would suggest this is not an original contract.

Pdmum

Thank you for your help Fruitcake.

This is my amended copy, if ok i will submit.
My comments on evidence provided by xxxxxx xxxx are as follows:
[FONT=&quot]The images of all signs are in daylight and are not true indicators of the conditions of the time of the alleged breach.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The entrance sign is very low, unlit and not in the usual field of vision for a driver entering directly from a main road. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The operator says that there is an approach to the car park . Images on page 19 and 27 show only pavement.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The images on page 27 are also very low and unlit and would not be seen until leaving the car park.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The operator has felt the need to circle the images of signage in order for them to be easily visible.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] An exaggerated image is not a true representation of how the signs would appear to a motorist.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator by their own admission on page 3 and in the close up image on page 18 state[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parking period commences 5 minutes after entry. (well below the BPA CoP recommendations)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The parking session has been calculated from the time of payment. So the alleged breach is incorrect. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Below the blown up image on page 18 is a statement saying the Appellant failed to enter the full, correct vehicle registration details at the payment terminal, therefore a parking charge notice was issued. This is untrue.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Page 41 headed ‘Other evidence’ there is a copy of the operators log showing payment for in their own words Appellants full and correct vehicle registration.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The operator states they have provided a log that the Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior to the date of the contravention and therefore the driver had sufficient opportunity to be aware of the terms and conditions.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I the Appellant was not in the vehicle on either the date of the alleged contravention or the day prior.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Evidence relating to the day prior to the alleged contravention is both irrelevant and misleading.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The operator states the Appellants vehicle was parked for 4 hours and 21 minutes but payment was only made for 4 hours..Therefore an unpaid parking session occurred and a Parking Charge Notice was issued. This is untrue.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The operator has provided a copy of the Parking Charge Notice (page 5) which contradicts the above statement..[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The operator states ‘with regards to the appellants remarks that the parking charge notice is punitive and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ .[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This statement has never been made by the appellant to the operator. Reference to the Parking Eye Ltd v Mr Barry Beavis was related only to the signage.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]The operator has provided a copy of the landowner agreement;[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There is no site plan included in the contract.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The original contract is undated with a hand written amendment.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The operator has not provided the names of the people who have signed the contract and there are no witness signatories for either party.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it and when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Parts 2, 3 and 4 are missing.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parts 10,11,13,14,16 and 17 are blank[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]For these reasons no conclusion can be reached that the PCN has been issued correctly.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There are a catalogue of obvious errors with this evidence and I respectfully ask for POPLA to uphold my appeal and cancel this PCN.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you[/FONT]





I understand i can copy into box on POPLA site as it doesnt exceed 2000 words?

KeithP

There are a catalogue of obvious errors with this evidence...

Then list them all... every single one of them.

Your task is to totally demolish everything they have said.

You should also robustly point out all the points in your appeal that they have not bothered to comment on as this clearly indicates that you are right.

I understand i can copy into box on POPLA site as it doesnt exceed 2000 words?

Do not restrict yourself to some artificial limit. If you have more to say then send it as a pdf attachment to an email.
The address is widely available on here.

Coupon-mad

Yes use the Portal if your comments can fit. It is best to use the Portal IMHO, I get the feeling a POPLA Assessor will look there and read short comments, but are less likely to read emailed comments, especially if very long.

I think you only get 2000 characters in the Portal though so you will have to cut it down!

If you can't, email it but IMHO it is second best. Shorter comments are better, via the Portal.

Pdmum

Thank you coupon mad.
Cant change much other than 'Page' to 'P' and maybe i should comment that operator has not contested my first 2 points . Shouldnt be much over the 2000 characters so looks like i will have to email and hope for the best.
Cant believe i said 2000 words!

Coupon-mad

Really?

I'd be cropping out unnecessary introductory sentences, like:

The operator has provided a copy of the landowner agreement;

No need to set the scene, just list bullet points.

Pdmum

OK. Will have another attempt tomorrow.
Want to give this the best chance.
Thank You

Pdmum

have managed to 'crop' down my comments and am just under 2000 characters with no spaces but just over with spaces.Will this go through ok?
Can post for final perusal?