Euro Car Parks - POPLA 2018 Appeal

poundstretcher1992

I do really appreciate your input, just feel silly that I didn’t post for help BEFORE submitting. I will update you with the reply/decision.

Thanks again!

poundstretcher1992

7. ECP response to POPLA appeal logged by THE REGISTERED KEEPER
This location is managed by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology which takes a picture of the vehicle entering and exiting the site, these pictures are timed and therefore the duration of the stay can be calculated. All vehicle registration numbers are then matched against the data produced by the various means of paying for parking and a list of registration numbers where no payment has been made or where the motorist has stayed longer than the period paid is produced. After requesting vehicle keeper details from the DVLA, a Notice to keeper is sent to the keepers of the vehicles on this list. As a consequence at ANPR locations there will be no PCN issued to the windscreen neither will there be photographic evidence of the windscreen supplied in operator evidence packs.
Parking Charge Notice ************ was issued to vehicle ******* for breach of terms and conditions the P&D/permit purchased did not cover the date and time of parking onsite at Browncross Street !!!8211; Manchester car park. This car park operates a 24 hour ANPR + P&D operation therefore all vehicles are required to purchase a valid ticket for the full duration of stay within the car park.
In THE REGISTERED KEEPERS appeal to POPLA he stated the following:
- The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA
- No Landowner Authority
- BPA Code of Practice - non-compliance
- Signage not clear and inadequate
- The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate
Euro Car Parks and would like to respond to the points raised in THE REGISTERED KEEPERS appeal with the following:
Section 18.3 of the British Parking Association's (BPA) code of practice explains that signs "must be conspicuous and legible and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signage on site is clear, when parking on private land it is the driver's responsibility to read the signage displayed and parked accordance with the terms and conditions as stated.
Euro Car Parks have provided photographic evidence showing that the appellant remained at the site for 2 hours and 20 minutes (Figure 1)
Euro Car Parks can confirm the signage on site is clearly and states it's a 24 hour pay and display car park. It is THE REGISTERED KEEPERS (THEY PUT MY NAME DESPITE ME NOT SAYING I WAS THE DRIVER) responsibility as the driver to read the terms and conditions (Figure 2) displayed and to ensure payment for park is made to cover the full duration of his stay on site.
Euro Car Parks can confirm that the notice has been issued under contract law the signage on site is clear and when parking on private land it is the responsibility of the driver to read aforementioned signage and park in accordance with the T&CS displayed.
!!!61623; The terms and conditions of parking are clearly displayed on the signage (including the charge payable should a breach of terms and conditions occur).
If the driver did not agree with these conditions they would have had the option to leave site and seek alternative parking.
An appropriate grace period is given to drivers on site to allow drivers to purchase a ticket and then leave site !!!8211; we obviously do not expect drivers to purchase a ticket as they drive in
According to BPA Code of Practise 13.4 !!!8211; car park operators should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended; before enforcement action is taken. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted; the grace period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes. I can confirm that Euro Car Parks have given THE REGISTERED KEEPER the suitable grace period of 10 minutes.
The vehicle entered the car park at 13:51 and exited the car park at 16:11, a total stay of 2 hours and 20 minutes
The car park is 24 hours pay and display and a valid payment for parking must be purchased for the full duration.
C1 MB
Please note Figure 3 is the transaction made matching the vehicle registration ******* where I can confirm the ticket purchased did not cover the full duration of parking according to the clearly displayed tariff.
Please note that the signage clearly states that the Browncross Street; Manchester car park also operates Pay By Phone as an alternative method of payment.
Figure 4 shows Euro Car Parks are POFA compliant.
Figure 5 is the agreement with ECP Holdings Ltd to manage the car park
Any form of parking ticket or !!!8216;notice!!!8217; is issued under the law !!!8216;of trespass and Contract Law!!!8217;. A driver who is invited (or chooses) to park on private land and use the car parking facilities and pays a fee/s does so under a contract (signage) with the car park operator. The parking contract sets out the terms that apply to the parking service, including the price.
The contract (signage) clearly states the extra charges are that the driver will incur and have to pay if they decide to break the contract terms, for example, by parking longer than the time paid for or exceeding the maximum time limit applicable.
With regards to the reference to !!!8220;Pre-Estimate of Loss/breach of consumer contracts 1999.!!!8221; Please be advised that the Supreme Court has made judgement (04/11/15) that clearly sets out the issue of parking charge notices on private land (law of contract applies) and in particular pre-estimate of loss. The parking charge notice is enforceable on the basis that it protected a legitimate interest when the driver failed to adhere to the terms and conditions and was not extravagant, exorbitant nor unconscionable. The parking charge is not an unenforceable penalty and does not breach the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.
It!!!8217;s the driver!!!8217;s responsibility to check the signage prior to leaving the vehicle on site. - Contract Law Applies !!!61623; With regards reliability/misreads of the ANPR system at this site and many private and council car parks who use this type of operation. The ANPR cameras are Police NAAS compliant, each individual camera is 93.1% accurate as specified by the supplier, it is well known (to include Police contraventions) that the information will not always be 100% correct, therefore there is always a possibility that there may be an error, however, if an issue is raised, following our complaints procedure a full investigation will be carried out by our Technical Department as quickly as possible with full information being supplied. Our Technical Teams visit the site/s regularly and monitor camera alignment and all on site equipment, back office systems are monitored 24/7. All equipment is fully tested before site installation, and fully tested for a number of weeks, information is processed and tested prior to any operation going live. The signage clearly states the terms and conditions of parking, it clearly states it is a 24 hour pay and display car park and that charges apply 24 hours a day. All drivers are required to purchcase a valid pay and display ticket for the duration of their stay. Signage is visble when entering and inside of the car park and when entering private land it would be the drivers responsibility to read the terms and conditions displayed before parking.

Figure 1 are uncropped picture of the driver entering and leaving the car park with time stamp
Figure 2 is the pay and display sign of charges
Figure 4 is a cropped picture of my REG next to the fee paid and time of ticket purchase (13:54)
Figure 4 is a sample PCN which was sent to me in the post
Figure 5 is what appears to be a signed contract dated 1 July 2015
Also attached are tonnes of pictures of the car park with a map of where signs are places however these are all undated.

My planned response (work in progress as I'm not sure what to write for some of the areas):

- The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA
- No Landowner Authority - a contract which was signed over 2 years ago by 2 named individuals which may or may not have the authority to do so (no job titles/position within the company).
- BPA Code of Practice - non-compliance
- Signage not clear and inadequate - attached to this appeal are generic photographs which could be from any car park. One of the signs shows an image of a sign that is CLEARLY not conspicuious hidden down the side of a vehicle. If this is an image ECP choose to support their argument of clear signage its come as no surprise that I the signage not clear and inadequate.
- The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate
The ANPR camera system does not show the amount of time the vehicle was actually parked and so this is 100% not accurate in being able to determine how long the car was actually parked. As you can imagine, this is a city centre car park on Christmas Eve! it was EXTREMELY busy with people queueing and looking for spaces and when trying to leave the car park (during rush hour traffic - on Christmas Eve, this could quite easily have been 20 minute overstay. Navigating the car park both on foot and in the car was like an episode of whacky racers.

If anybody could help with some extra stuff to reply back I'd greatly appreciate it.

if you need anyone info on contract etc I can try and upload.

Thankyou!

Coupon-mad

Can we see the landowner contract, yes.

Remove this, no need to re-state your appeal and this bit won't win anyway:

- The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA

Some suggested changes:

- Signage not clear and inadequate - [STRIKE]attached to this appeal are[/STRIKE] the 'evidence' comprises undated, generic photographs which could be from any car park. One of the signs shows an image of a sign that is CLEARLY not [STRIKE]conspicuious[/STRIKE] conspicuous, hidden down the side of a vehicle. If this is an image ECP choose to support their argument, it is reasonable to form the view [STRIKE]of clear signage its come as no surprise[/STRIKE] that the driver only knew about the fee/tariff displayed at the machine, not about any penalty or any made-up term that the time started before the time printed on the P&D ticket. None of that was stated at the machine. [STRIKE]I the signage not clear and inadequate.[/STRIKE]

poundstretcher1992

Thankyou! ill get those changes updated - I've uploaded the 3 images of the contract to google cloud but as a new user I'm having trouble sharing the link.

photos.app.goo.gl/6CoWPCSnmoNpUinT2

KeithP

https://photos.app.goo.gl/6CoWPCSnmoNpUinT2

So Euro Car Parks allegedly have a contract with ECP Holding Plc.

Interesting.

I guess they mean ECP (Holdings) Plc, who were once called... wait for it...
Euro Car Parks Limited.

Umkomaas

KeithP wrote: »

https://photos.app.goo.gl/6CoWPCSnmoNpUinT2

So Euro Car Parks allegedly have a contract with ECP Holding Plc.

Interesting.

I guess they mean ECP (Holdings) Plc, who were once called... wait for it...
Euro Car Parks Limited.

Check out the ECP (Holdings) Ltd's signatory's (R Plant) Linkedin profile. Seems like he's been employed by Euro Car Parks for the past 25 years.

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/robert-plant-33036544

Do ECP actually own the car park?

poundstretcher1992

This is my updated reply to POPLA:

Could anybody suggest any improvements to help increase my chances of a successful appeal?




No Landowner Authority - EPC have provided evidence of what appears to be a contract which was signed over 2 years ago by 2 named individuals who may or may not have the authority to sign on this companies behalf (no job titles or position within the company).

Signage not clear and inadequate - The !!!8216;evidence!!!8217; comprises undated, generic photographs which could be from any car park. One of the images shows a sign that is CLEARLY not conspicuous, hidden down the side of a vehicle. If this is, an image ECP chooses to support their argument; it is reasonable to form the view that the driver only knew about the fee/tariff displayed at the machine, not about any penalty or any made-up term that the time started before the time printed on the P&D ticket. None of that was stated at the machine.


The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate.
As ECP have stated, the ANPR cameras are (at best) 93.1%
accurate, this coupled with the fact that the ANPR camera system does not show the amount of time the vehicle was actually parked only adds even more doubt as to their accuracy. As you can imagine, this is a CITY CENTRE car park on Christmas Eve! It was EXTREMELY busy with people queueing around the car park and looking for spaces. When trying to leave the car park (during rush hour traffic and on Christmas Eve) this could quite easily have taken 20 minutes (which ECP claim is a PARKING overstay) when you factor in finding a space, queueing for a P&D ticket, exiting the busy car park on foot, returning to the busy car park on foot, loading the shopping into the car and finally queueing to get off the car park. Navigating the car park both on foot and in the car was like an episode of whacky racers and ECP cannot reasonably expect the driver to risk their life to rush across this busy car park, surely safety is more important.