pcn to registered keeper

Coupon-mad

Change and to ampersand, change long words into shorter words. Remove connectives.

You need spaces.

Pdmum

Thanks for that coupon mad, got it down to1934with spaces. If its to the Portal should i add the reference?
Here it is ready to submit i hope!

[FONT=&quot]Images of signs are in daylight & not true indicators of conditions at time of the alleged breach[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Entrance sign is low unlit & not in field of vision for driver entering directly from a main road with no approach.[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]P19 &27 contradict operators claim.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]P27 shows signs visible on exit only[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator has circled images of signage for clarity[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] An exaggerated image is not a true representation of how the signs would appear to a motorist[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator says on P3 & P18 sign[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parking period starts 5 mins after entry (below BPA CoP 10mins)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Period has been wrongly calculated from time of payment/entry [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Statement below image P18 contradicts operators log P41 , not shown on PCN P5[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator’s log shows Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior to date of contravention is irrelevant & misleading, however I the Appellant was not in the vehicle on either occasion[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator says Appellants vehicle was parked for 4 hr & 21 mins, payment was made for 4 hr. An unpaid parking session occurred & a PCN was issued. This contradicts copy of PCN shown on P5[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator states ‘with regards to Appellants remarks that the parking charge notice is punitive & not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ .[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This statement has never been made by the appellant to the operator. Reference to Parking Eye Ltd v Mr Barry Beavis relates only to signage[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There is no site plan included in contract[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Original contract is undated with hand written amendment[/FONT]s
[FONT=&quot]Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parts 2 3 &4 are missing[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &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 & I respectfully ask for POPLA to uphold my appeal & cancel this PCN[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you[/FONT]

I could also add to last paragraph that no evidence to oppose points 1&2 of appeal?

Coupon-mad

If its to the Portal should i add the reference?

No need because you use the password & POPLA code to access your own spot in the Portal.

How about:

PPC had to circle images of signs, proves not prominent.

instead of:

Operator has circled images of signage for clarity

This is far too long:

[STRIKE]Operator's[/STRIKE] The log shows [STRIKE]Appellants[/STRIKE] vehicle[STRIKE] had been[/STRIKE] parked on site the day prior. [STRIKE]to date of contravention is irrelevant & misleading,[/STRIKE][STRIKE]however I[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]the Appellant[/STRIKE] I (keeper) was not in the vehicle on either occasion, which could have been two drivers and is irrelevant.

Lose words there and you can add back some words to the most 'clipped' points, so they make sense.

Pdmum

Lovely thank you.
Will edit and show changes .

Pdmum

Hope this is good to go!

[FONT=&quot]Images of signs are in daylight & not true indicators of conditions at time of the alleged breach[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Entrance sign is low unlit & not in field of vision for driver entering directly from a main road .with no approach.[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]P19 &27 contradict operators claim of approach.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]P27 shows entry signs visible on exit only[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]PPC had to circle images of signs, proves not prominent.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]An exaggerated image is not a true representation of how the signs would appear to a motorist[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator says on P3 & P18 sign:-[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parking period starts 5 mins after entry (below BPA CoP 10mins)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Period has been wrongly calculated from time of payment/entry [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Statement below image P18 contradicts operators log P41 , and is irrelevant to PCN P5[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The log shows vehicle parked on site the day prior. I (keeper) was not in the vehicle on either occasion, which could have been two drivers and is irrelevant.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator says Appellants vehicle was parked for 4 hr & 21 mins, payment was made for 4 hr. An unpaid parking session occurred & a PCN was issued. This contradicts copy of PCN shown on P5 & is irrelevant.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Operator states ‘with regards to Appellants remarks that the parking charge notice is punitive & not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ .[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This statement has never been made by the appellant to the operator. Reference to Parking Eye Ltd v Mr Barry Beavis relates only to signage[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There is no site plan included in contract[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Original contract is undated with hand written amendment[/FONT]s
[FONT=&quot]Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parts 2 3 &4 are missing[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &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 & points 1&2 of appeal are unopposed. I respectfully ask for POPLA to uphold my appeal & cancel this PCN[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

I would cut & paste all of this to the top, as the contract is your best hand at POPLA:

There is no site plan included in contract
Original contract is undated with hand written amendments
Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.
A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date
Parts 2 3 &4 are missing
Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &17 are blank

Pdmum

Thank you for all your help with this.
Fingers crossed!
Will update the result.

Pdmum

Just heard my appeal has been unsuccessful. Very disapointed , especially as POPLA say 'in assessing this appeal i have considered the evidence provided by the operator to be true as the appellant has failed to rebut their claims' which is totally untrue. Can i complain about this?

Redx

yes you can complain about it , to the lead assessor, but it wont change the outcome

what may well change the outcome is any future court case via the MCOL route

you are under no obligation to pay this unless a judge says so (same as everyone else that receives an invoice, any invoice)

The_Deep

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences. [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Parking Eye, Smart and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (who take hundreds of these cases to court, and nearly always lose), who have also been reported to the regulatory authority. [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.[/FONT]