We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Is this worth appealing or just paying? Please help
Options
Danlad99
Posts: 25 Forumite
Fine for 3 minutes in my car (no grace period?) , and signs so hidden, I was unable to spot them anyway.
Spent an hour reading a similar case which lost, but eventually won in court, of a guy stopping for less than a minute and popla rejecting the appeal twice whilst withholding all data from the company and not divulging it. He spent hours and hours going through a lengthy process of writing and fact gathering and then even more hours compiling a pre court info thing, and the stress. Finally due to the parking enforcers solicitors accidently sending out a 'you have lost letter, pay up', I think it was just this reason and their sloppy inconsistencies and lack of detail that made it struck down.
£60 isn't worth my time of hours of work (I'm lazy lol), so my question is, do I have a chance from the expert guys on here, based on my particular case.... Or will popla likely reject
Summary:
==========
The driver of the car pulled into a side street to use greggs, with a friend nipping in, but didn't use their designated parking bit, instead, just parked on the main road of this side street which is the entrance to an industrial estate. Did not see any signs, and was technically in the grace period as the pcn is for 3 minutes.
The left turn side street is at a right angle of a busy fast moving road, dual lane in parts, so you have to turn in very quickly.
Photo below showing main road where people do close to 40mph, and the sharp left, to Greggs, and the industrial estate entrance:
[I can't post links yet, so please copy into a browser page to view]
photos.app.goo.gl/7M5A5hidfG1XCqgJ8
As you turn in, the first sign is right on that corner, making it impossible to see or read as you'd have to stop half way on the main road and half way into the side road to read or notice it even. Making it very dangerous, and a given that you'd miss it. It is also covered slightly by bramble bush, inset within the bushed over fence, as opposed to a pole that you'd notice.
Here is the sign, inset, on the corner, and barely visible even in a frozen frame photo let alone +30mph moving traffic.
photos.app.goo.gl/HPWVuXAhtNroA1uHA
The driver drove past the sign hidden and nestled against wired fencing (no stand out pole), bramble covered, inset, at the corner, eyes on the road whilst driving into the 90 degree left turn, and parked against the kerb here just past the corner (again no visible signs)
photos.app.goo.gl/G8U17JLH5jkwwgaW8
Here is the pcn photo evidence showing the same, along with the letter, in case it may in itself have some improprieties:
photos.app.goo.gl/MkSntsdPSfuggSxD9
Where the driver was parked against the kerb, this was the view from the car pictured below, again no visible signs, and nothing noticeable within the entire windscreen vista, no stopping sign pole, not even red no stopping road markings to prompt you to investigate further for hidden signage:
photos.app.goo.gl/qrRSMsa2fF3xQJZm8
It is only on driving further forward by ten meters past the bulk of bramble is the following sign seen, barely noticeable from car level and obscured by bramble. (I only noticed this after coming back to take these pics) :
photos.app.goo.gl/mw7WrX1tkJu2xrLTA
The only real notable sign in the whole area is that of Greggs, which can only be seen zoomed in, hence two pics. It's noteworthy because it gives the impression of 'more' parking further on, implying the area the car where it pulled up was ok. If a similar sign was anywhere in the entire vista from the car showing "no stopping" , the driver would not have stopped naturally, and instead parked several meters across into a bayed area for Greggs spaces, which most would presume is over spill for when it gets busy at rush lunchtimes. Photos:
photos.app.goo.gl/GqqV7FeujjRjbTH19
photos.app.goo.gl/2ujWC8rqSpE5Z8AU8
And finally, here is the initial sign at corner, bramble taken away, close up so it can be read by you guys. But please bear in mind, it doesn't look clear like this in real life, being on the corner of a fence at a right-angle sharp left turn from a wide fast moving traffic road, makes it impossible to spot unless you come to a complete halt and extremely dangerously stop halfway between both roads whilst turning to look. Your eyes, due to driving, naturally are on the road, for safety, so by default you would miss it anyway.
photos.app.goo.gl/KSYEZttWWiMZKoVV7
Finally, so I do not omit anything, here is the Google street view of the corner, which actually doesn't even have the sign on, so it may be very recent, which should all the more mean clearer signage should be visible due to a sudden change from unrestricted parking to no stopping. You can also note the road name sign, which below it in small letters says private road. Again hard to see the when turning in, but either way, a private road doesn't automatically mean no stopping. It has most likely always been a private road.
photos.app.goo.gl/G4ZLa8gLx6hwT9q6A
So, with all information, what are my chances of getting this over-turned and how do I initially respond to the company to contest.
I've noticed from several hours of reading cases (but stupidly not 'read this first' sticky, sorry), that you can come out with lots of technical lingo and paragraphs of specific acts, but popla don't seem to focused on that but rather genuine merit, and could happily consider a case written to them in layman's terms too (me lol) . They also don't seem as bothered about the grace period, especially if its clear you've not used that period to read the signage then chosen to leave, but instead have let someone nip to Greggs, even though it doesn't state anywhere what you have to do during that graceperiod. Either way, it doesn't so much apply to me, as had I have seen signs, I'd have read them.
Finally the cases I read, perhaps by chance, seen to give more precedence to signage and such, rather than improprieties, reasonable fee, or correct up to date documents showing the company has authority by the land owner etc showing the area plotted out for example. Based on this I wonder if my argument would be considered.
In light of all the above, any feedback on what the next move should be, or to just pay the fine would be greatly appreciated. There is 11 days left before the fine goes to £100. Do I write to the company?
Many thanks
D
:j
Spent an hour reading a similar case which lost, but eventually won in court, of a guy stopping for less than a minute and popla rejecting the appeal twice whilst withholding all data from the company and not divulging it. He spent hours and hours going through a lengthy process of writing and fact gathering and then even more hours compiling a pre court info thing, and the stress. Finally due to the parking enforcers solicitors accidently sending out a 'you have lost letter, pay up', I think it was just this reason and their sloppy inconsistencies and lack of detail that made it struck down.
£60 isn't worth my time of hours of work (I'm lazy lol), so my question is, do I have a chance from the expert guys on here, based on my particular case.... Or will popla likely reject
Summary:
==========
The driver of the car pulled into a side street to use greggs, with a friend nipping in, but didn't use their designated parking bit, instead, just parked on the main road of this side street which is the entrance to an industrial estate. Did not see any signs, and was technically in the grace period as the pcn is for 3 minutes.
The left turn side street is at a right angle of a busy fast moving road, dual lane in parts, so you have to turn in very quickly.
Photo below showing main road where people do close to 40mph, and the sharp left, to Greggs, and the industrial estate entrance:
[I can't post links yet, so please copy into a browser page to view]
photos.app.goo.gl/7M5A5hidfG1XCqgJ8
As you turn in, the first sign is right on that corner, making it impossible to see or read as you'd have to stop half way on the main road and half way into the side road to read or notice it even. Making it very dangerous, and a given that you'd miss it. It is also covered slightly by bramble bush, inset within the bushed over fence, as opposed to a pole that you'd notice.
Here is the sign, inset, on the corner, and barely visible even in a frozen frame photo let alone +30mph moving traffic.
photos.app.goo.gl/HPWVuXAhtNroA1uHA
The driver drove past the sign hidden and nestled against wired fencing (no stand out pole), bramble covered, inset, at the corner, eyes on the road whilst driving into the 90 degree left turn, and parked against the kerb here just past the corner (again no visible signs)
photos.app.goo.gl/G8U17JLH5jkwwgaW8
Here is the pcn photo evidence showing the same, along with the letter, in case it may in itself have some improprieties:
photos.app.goo.gl/MkSntsdPSfuggSxD9
Where the driver was parked against the kerb, this was the view from the car pictured below, again no visible signs, and nothing noticeable within the entire windscreen vista, no stopping sign pole, not even red no stopping road markings to prompt you to investigate further for hidden signage:
photos.app.goo.gl/qrRSMsa2fF3xQJZm8
It is only on driving further forward by ten meters past the bulk of bramble is the following sign seen, barely noticeable from car level and obscured by bramble. (I only noticed this after coming back to take these pics) :
photos.app.goo.gl/mw7WrX1tkJu2xrLTA
The only real notable sign in the whole area is that of Greggs, which can only be seen zoomed in, hence two pics. It's noteworthy because it gives the impression of 'more' parking further on, implying the area the car where it pulled up was ok. If a similar sign was anywhere in the entire vista from the car showing "no stopping" , the driver would not have stopped naturally, and instead parked several meters across into a bayed area for Greggs spaces, which most would presume is over spill for when it gets busy at rush lunchtimes. Photos:
photos.app.goo.gl/GqqV7FeujjRjbTH19
photos.app.goo.gl/2ujWC8rqSpE5Z8AU8
And finally, here is the initial sign at corner, bramble taken away, close up so it can be read by you guys. But please bear in mind, it doesn't look clear like this in real life, being on the corner of a fence at a right-angle sharp left turn from a wide fast moving traffic road, makes it impossible to spot unless you come to a complete halt and extremely dangerously stop halfway between both roads whilst turning to look. Your eyes, due to driving, naturally are on the road, for safety, so by default you would miss it anyway.
photos.app.goo.gl/KSYEZttWWiMZKoVV7
Finally, so I do not omit anything, here is the Google street view of the corner, which actually doesn't even have the sign on, so it may be very recent, which should all the more mean clearer signage should be visible due to a sudden change from unrestricted parking to no stopping. You can also note the road name sign, which below it in small letters says private road. Again hard to see the when turning in, but either way, a private road doesn't automatically mean no stopping. It has most likely always been a private road.
photos.app.goo.gl/G4ZLa8gLx6hwT9q6A
So, with all information, what are my chances of getting this over-turned and how do I initially respond to the company to contest.
I've noticed from several hours of reading cases (but stupidly not 'read this first' sticky, sorry), that you can come out with lots of technical lingo and paragraphs of specific acts, but popla don't seem to focused on that but rather genuine merit, and could happily consider a case written to them in layman's terms too (me lol) . They also don't seem as bothered about the grace period, especially if its clear you've not used that period to read the signage then chosen to leave, but instead have let someone nip to Greggs, even though it doesn't state anywhere what you have to do during that graceperiod. Either way, it doesn't so much apply to me, as had I have seen signs, I'd have read them.
Finally the cases I read, perhaps by chance, seen to give more precedence to signage and such, rather than improprieties, reasonable fee, or correct up to date documents showing the company has authority by the land owner etc showing the area plotted out for example. Based on this I wonder if my argument would be considered.
In light of all the above, any feedback on what the next move should be, or to just pay the fine would be greatly appreciated. There is 11 days left before the fine goes to £100. Do I write to the company?
Many thanks
D
:j
0
Comments
-
You do need to read up on this game in the FAQ thread - from what you say you aren't at Popla stage yet???
Have you appealed to the PPC and had it rejected?0 -
It all comes down to how much you value your time. It is a nuisance, can take many hours to get up to speed, and in the end can all be a waste of time if the PPC drops the claim. However, if you like playing mind games, it might be for you.
See what MPs think of the scam here.
http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0 -
-
You do need to read up on this game in the FAQ thread - from what you say you aren't at Popla stage yet???
Have you appealed to the PPC and had it rejected?
No none, but I've just read the faq at the top now finally. It just looked so long winded it scared me lol.
Firstly, based on what I've shown do people believe there is merit in my case to popla? If so, I will then use the template to content the pcn, and get a popla code, and literally put what I've put above to them. With pics etc.
The only other thing which I'm confused over, is this is the first contact, ntk, and it's over 14 days by one day...which makes it void by default only if its worded in such a way or something is missing in the letter... What an I looking for or not looking for, for the 14 day rule to apply. My vague understanding is that that have to imply somewhere that the keeper is ultimately liable if no driver is given? And if so, if that isn't implied, could I not write and refuse to give the driver details, whereby they'll reply and hold the keeper liable, allowing me to cite the 14 day rule?0 -
It all comes down to how much you value your time. It is a nuisance, can take many hours to get up to speed, and in the end can all be a waste of time if the PPC drops the claim. However, if you like playing mind games, it might be for you.
]
After reading the faq it seems pretty quick and simple. A quick template email to the company, get a popla code, then pretty much write to the the original post with supporting photos.
I dont think bringing up all the other points or legal jargon would really help in this case, other than pointing out the bpa grace period. The complete lack of clear visible signage is pretty damming surely? And what's what I wanted to ask you guys first, is it damning and hence worth perusing.
I don't mind the time if I think it should be a win, and my particular case doesn't seem complicated either.It's a bit more than that. Even if £60 means little to you in order to get rid of an inconvenience, do you really want to fund a scam industry and line the pockets of people who act in such a vile, predatory and amoral way?
Exactly, its the principal anyway. I just didn't want to try if you guys didn't think I had a good standing hence your thoughts?
Also, unless I've read it wrong, it mentions by bpa the reduced rate should be /must be no n more than 40% (so £40), but its £600 -
The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »It's a bit more than that. Even if £60 means little to you in order to get rid of an inconvenience, do you really want to fund a scam industry and line the pockets of people who act in such a vile, predatory and amoral way?
And, it's a bit more than that, too. I've known a couple of people who've paid because they do not handle stress well and any ongoing case (which could last a long time) would be a bit too much for them. I do understand that works completely in the PPCs favour, btw, and they are relying on that. One other person paid on the grounds that they accepted they were in the wrong
This isn't me advocating paying in any way shape or form. But, individuals have their own situations and lives and I don't think anyone should blame someone for giving in if it is the best thing for them, personally. It needs the introduction of Greg Knight's bill to sort this out. That's me being optimistic, btw. I am not entirely convinced that this bill will produce an equitable solution for all concerned.0 -
Think on this, if you pay them you will be funding white slavery, imports of cocaine and heroin, and fake Nikes in your local market.You never know how far you can go until you go too far.0
-
After reading the faq it seems pretty quick and simple. A quick template email to the company, get a popla code, then pretty much write to the the original post with supporting photos.
I dont think bringing up all the other points or legal jargon would really help in this case, other than pointing out the bpa grace period. The complete lack of clear visible signage is pretty damming surely? And what's what I wanted to ask you guys first, is it damning and hence worth perusing.
I don't mind the time if I think it should be a win, and my particular case doesn't seem complicated either.
Exactly, its the principal anyway. I just didn't want to try if you guys didn't think I had a good standing hence your thoughts?
Also, unless I've read it wrong, it mentions by bpa the reduced rate should be /must be no n more than 40% (so £40), but its £60
So why do you think several people have gone to the trouble of spending hundreds of hours of their own time to produce the legal points if there is no point in using them?
The legal points work. You only need one of them to work and you win. The scammers need to beat each and every point to win. The more points you put, the harder it is for them and the easier for you.
It's mostly only copy and paste anyway. All the hard work has been done for you.I married my cousin. I had to...I don't have a sister.
All my screwdrivers are cordless."You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks0 -
^^
I think because popla pretty much ignore all copy paste stuff of various vague reasons and focus on the main one.
That said, it seems the perps have to reply, like getting the land owner document etc, and them ommiting such stuff works in your favour so I see your point, and as you say it's pretty much done.
No one yet given any indication whether the signage or lack of is infact poorly placed giving a good chance of popla cancellation, which suggests it isn't?0 -
When you appeal to POPLA you only have to win on one point. The ppc has to win on every point.
By making them demonstrate multiple points such as signs, landowner authority etc there's more scope for them to get sloppy and miss something.
Many ppc's will see how many points they need to prove and simply not bother.
That's why a multipoint appeal is recommended. Most is just cut and paste but it makes the ppc have to work.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards