Advise on appeal wording for bad signing

ppsigning

Just thought i'd pop in to say that at the moment they JUST submitted their evidence against me and it is INCREDIBLY weak.


It's basically just pictures of all of the signs at the location, pdf copies of my appeal to them and the letters they sent me.


and then just this:

ANPR Overstay The Terms and Conditions of parking at this location are clearly displayed at the entrance and throughout the car park. It is the vehicle driver responsibility to ensure that when parking on private property they do so in accordance with the Terms and Conditions in force at the particular location. The vehicle in question was observed by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition system for parking longer period than allowed which was in contravention of the car parks Terms and Conditions of use. The signage have been approved by the BPA and fully comply with the code of practice. Entrance signs states that there is parking conditions in place and to refer to the terms and conditions inside the car park for full details. It is the driver responsibility to do so. We duly enclose a witness statement from the landlord. Had the appellant paid attention to the notice to keeper received he would clearly see that the notice not only refers to the amount of time the vehicle was recorded on site, but what the maximum stay at the location is. The notice to keeper fully complies with POFA 2012. The signage makes reference that the site operates ANPR and that the site is monitored 24 hour a day.

Umkomaas

Had the appellant paid attention to the notice to keeper received he would clearly see that the notice not only refers to the amount of time the vehicle was recorded on site, but what the maximum stay at the location is.

The NtK is irrelevant to the parking contract. Do the signs differentiate 'time on site' and 'maximum stay'? Do the signs specifically use those terms or do they talk about 'maximum parking times'. Exploit this in your rebuttal if appropriate.

ppsigning

The exact wording on the signs is also "Maximum stay"


I will definitely be stating that the NtK is irrelevant in the matter however, and that they didn't address the points about illegible fine amount whatso ever and instead just went "yes we comply with the CoP".



Also I find it funny how they stated they have included a witness statement from the landlord, except they didn't....

Umkomaas

Also I find it funny how they stated they have included a witness statement from the landlord, except they didn't....

Hit them hard on this. Do not let POPLA make a decision if they've received a copy and you haven't.

POPLA seem to accept any old crappy Witness Statement, even from lowly customer services personnel.

ppsigning

This is what i've got at the moment, very quick draft

Dear POPLA assessor,

I shall respond to TPS!!!8217; evidence pack similarly to how they have laid it out.

!!!8220;The Terms and Conditions of parking at this location are clearly displayed at the entrance and throughout the car park. It is the vehicle driver responsibility to ensure that when parking on private property they do so in accordance with the Terms and Conditions in force at the particular location. The vehicle in question was observed by our Automatic Number Plate Recognition system for parking longer period than allowed which was in contravention of the car parks Terms and Conditions of use.!!!8221;

The signage have been approved by the BPA and fully comply with the code of practice.

TPS have failed to mention the relevance of POPLA Schedule 4 which specifically required !!!8216;adequate notice of the parking charge!!!8217;. I fail to see any evidence that BPA have specifically approved this sign as they themselves state that they must !!!8216;adequately bring the charges to the attention of the driver!!!8217; which small white font does not do.

Entrance signs states that there is parking conditions in place and to refer to the terms and conditions inside the car park for full details. It is the driver responsibility to do so.

Full details whcih would expand on the maximum stay, which, on the day of the drivers visit stated 3 hours maximum due to graffiti. It is TPS!!!8217; responsibility to maintain the signs, which they failed to do.

We duly enclose a witness statement from the landlord.

Within the POPA portal there is NO witness statement from anybody. TPS have failed to prove that they have landowner authority by not including any statement or evidence that is visible to myself.

Had the appellant paid attention to the notice to keeper received he would clearly see that the notice not only refers to the amount of time the vehicle was recorded on site, but what the maximum stay at the location is. The notice to keeper fully complies with POFA 2012.

The notice does not prove the amount of time the vehicle was recorded on site, the notice merely stated times that the vehicle entered and left the site. TPS have not provided POPLA with any evidence that the vehicle actually parked on the land, nor did the Notice to Keepers as shown in their evidence pack ever state !!!8220;period of parking!!!8221; and as explained TPS can not substitute !!!8220;stay at location!!!8221; in place of the POFA required !!!8220;period of parking!!!8221;.

The signage makes reference that the site operates ANPR and that the site is monitored 24 hour a day.
Making reference to ANPR does not mean they have fully complied with ICO Code of Practice and TPS have no evidence to show that they have complied. They made no attempt to prove that they fully complied with ICO CoP. The evidence pack contains recently added plaques that were installed due to the recent law coming in with regards to data privacy, GDPR. You can see in my original appeal that it was not on the entrance sign, nor anywhere else on the land, at the relevant time of this appeal.

KeithP

Don't get too carried away Ppsigning.

You only have space for 2000 characters for the PoPLA rebuttal and your draft is currently around 3000.

ppsigning

How's this for a sub 2k comments?

Dear POPLA assessor,

I shall respond to TPS!!!8217; evidence pack similarly to how they have laid it out.

1. TPS have failed to mention the relevance of POPLA Sch. 4 which specifically required !!!8216;adequate notice of the parking charge!!!8217;. BPA also state that they must !!!8216;adequately bring the charges to the attention of the driver!!!8217; which the small white font used on their notices does not do.

2. Full details of conditions which would expand on the maximum stay which, on the day of the drivers visit, stated 3 hours maximum due to graffiti. It is TPS!!!8217; responsibility to maintain the signs, which they failed to do.


3. Within the POPLA portal there is NO witness statement uploaded. TPS have failed to prove that they have landowner authority by not including any statement or evidence that is visible to myself on the portal. Thus it should be assumed they have no authority to operate.


4. The notice does not prove the amount of time the vehicle was parked on site it stated times that the vehicle entered and left the site. TPS have not provided POPLA with any evidence that the vehicle actually parked on the land, nor did the Notice to Keepers as shown in their evidence pack ever state !!!8220;period of parking!!!8221;


5. Making reference to ANPR does not mean they have fully complied with ICO CoP and TPS have no evidence to show that they have complied. The evidence pack contains recently added plaques that you can see in my original appeal were not on the entrance sign, nor anywhere else on the land, at the relevant time of this appeal.


TPS failed to refute any of my appeal points and their evidence was thin and lacking.

Coupon-mad

POPLA Sch. 4

should be:

POFA Sch. 4

ppsigning

Thanks for all the help so far guys.


Someone from POPLA has picked the case up, i couldn't see them in the POPLA Decisions however, they have emailed to send over the missing files from the POPLA portal including a witness statement from a "Estates Surveyor" for the retail company on the car park.



They also asked if I would like to add any more comments via email response.



What should I send back to them? Anything?



I've said all i can think of so far as in main appeal and the comments I left on the evidence pack, albeit now they actually HAVE a witness statement.

Coupon-mad

What else was missing?

And how did POPLA notice this, did they contact you because your comments mentioned no retailer WS? Never seen this before, AIUI whatever is uploaded to the Portal comes directly from the PPC and they can't add more later...