POPLA Appeal

nosferatu1001

Its not just "nothing on the back", its also that it was delivered too late. They havent tried to claim the keeper is liable, so I as a KEEPER appellat cannot have liability in this matter and the appeal must be upheld.

Coupon-mad

Hang on, hang on, the dates are stated wrongly (correct me if I am wrong).

30th December was a Saturday.

The 1st, New Year's Day, was Bank Holiday Monday.

The soonest this PCN could have joined the postal service was Tues 2nd, and so the first day it was deemed delivered is Thursday 4th, which is at least 16 days after the event. Non POFA wording too.

You need to remind POPLA you were not driving as well, but your words are restricted.

You will also not be able to fit it all into the (very restricted) Portal, so remove unnecessary repetition, e.g. all of these words could be pruned:

Parking Eye have mixed this into their signs despite the fact they appear to be new and should match the requirements of the BPA CoP.
4.Furthermore it simply would not be possible to read any signs whilst in a moving car, and certainly not have read them sufficiently to have be deemed to fully understand the T&C's to which it is alleged I agreed as the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Switch to bullet points, no 'furthermores' and no full sentences, use & instead of 'and' etc.

TESS64

Thanks for the feedback - the portal says 2000 words - below is less than 400 so I assume the below revised statement is fine (or is it too short?)

!!!8220;

Dear Sirs

Ref. POPLA appeal nnnnnnnnnnnn

I am writing to you to lodge a formal appeal against a parking charge notice (PCN) sent to
myself as registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

In response to the "evidence pack" ParkingEye Ltd have submitted:

1. The Notice to Keeper (NTK) is not compliant with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) because it has nothing on the back about the POFA.
2. The PCN was incurred at the Holiday Inn Oxford on 19/12/2017 and as I have already stated, although I am the keeper of the vehicle, I was NOT the driver.
3. ParkingEye did not issue the ticket until 30.12.17. The PCN is presumed to have been delivered on the second working day after the date of posting, which for a PCN dated Saturday 30th December 2017 would be Thursday 4th January 2018 thus breaching 14 days to issue the PCN.
4. The landowner contract is heavily redacted, and covers up much of the information about the definition of services and as such, it fails to comply with the BPA Code of Practice para 7. The start date is more than 12 months ago and there is nothing to say the end date, or if the contract has been renewed, or continues into perpetuity.
5. Specifically mentioned in the BPA Code of Practice is the use of capital letters. Mixing large and small font are also deemed unclear as far as signage is concerned. Parking Eye have mixed this into their signs despite the fact they appear to be new and should match the requirements of the BPA Code of Practice.
6. It is not possible to read any parking signs whilst in a moving car and fully understand the T&C's to which it is alleged I agreed as the registered keeper of the vehicle. ParkingEye's own 'evidence' photos show that a number of the signs are perpendicular to the flow of traffic.
7. These signs could not be seen in the dark and the rain as on the December night in question. All of the photos in ParkingEyes evidence pack are a year old and are provided only in daylight.
8. There is nothing to prove how close the car was parked to a sign.

In summary, these points demonstrate the claim by ParkingEye Ltd is invalid and should the claim continue, further action and evidence requested in this appeal is required from ParkingEye Ltd."

KeithP

TESS64 wrote: »

- the portal says 2000 words -

Does it?

Or does it say 2000 characters?

Coupon-mad

It's characters. You have MUCH less space than you think, hence remove the waffle!

All this immediately gone, no need, and you are NOT lodging an 'appeal' (it's comments stage):

Dear Sirs

Ref. POPLA appeal nnnnnnnnnnnn

I am writing to you to lodge a formal appeal against a parking charge notice (PCN) sent to
myself as registered keeper of the vehicle in question.

And for example, here:

In response to the "evidence pack" ParkingEye Ltd have submitted:

you can cut it to:

My comments on the evidence are:

TESS64

Thanks - my mistake - the below is just under 2000 characters so I will leave it as it is unless you recommend that I need to include any more relevant details:

My comments on the evidence are:

1. The Notice to Keeper (NTK) is not compliant with Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) because it does not include any of the mandatory wording as required by POFA.
2. The PCN was incurred on 19/12/2017 and as I have already stated, although I am the keeper of the vehicle, I was NOT the driver.
3. The PCN is presumed to have been delivered on the second working day after the date of posting, which for a PCN dated Saturday 30th December 2017 would be Thursday 4th January 2018 (discounting New Year's Day Bank Holiday) thus exceeding 14 days for service.
4. The landowner contract is heavily redacted and covers up much of the information about the definition of services and as such, it fails to comply with the BPA Code of Practice para 7. The start date is more than 12 months ago and there is nothing to say the end date, or if the contract has been renewed, or continues into perpetuity.
5. Specifically mentioned in the BPA Code of Practice is the use of capital letters. Mixing large and small font are also deemed unclear as far as signage is concerned. Parking Eye have mixed this into their signs despite the fact they appear to be new and should match the requirements of the BPA Code of Practice.
6. It is not possible to read any parking signs whilst in a moving car and fully understand the T&C's to which it is alleged I agreed as the registered keeper of the vehicle. ParkingEye's own 'evidence' photos show that a number of the signs are perpendicular to the flow of traffic.
7. These signs could not be seen in the dark and the rain as on the December night in question. All of the photos in ParkingEye's evidence pack are a year old and are provided only in daylight.
8. There is nothing to prove how close the car was parked to a sign.

In summary, these points demonstrate the claim by ParkingEye is invalid and should the claim continue, further action and evidence requested in this appeal is required from ParkingEye"

nosferatu1001

1) ....Because it does not include any of the mandatory wording as required by POFA
Who cares WHERE on the NtK that could be, its missing and what is missing is the important bit

TESS64

Thank you - amended above - I'll send it over later unless there are any more suggested changes?

Coupon-mad

3. [STRIKE]ParkingEye did not issue the ticket until 30.12.17.[/STRIKE] The PCN is presumed to have been delivered on the second working day after the date of posting, which for a PCN dated Saturday 30th December 2017 would be Thursday 4th January 2018 (discounting to New Year's Day Bank Holiday) thus exceeding [STRIKE]breaching[/STRIKE] 14 days for service. [STRIKE]to issue the PCN[/STRIKE].

How about that, just pointing out the Bank Holiday in case POPLA miss it.

TESS64

Successful appeal

Thank you Coupon-mad, nosferatu1001 and all the others that gave advice - a nice surprise on my birthday !