Keeper address not added in 1st appeal template. Parking firm replied after 28th day

PeterParker123

Hi guys, some context

Driver was recorded on two separate days, (via man on site with a camera).

Incident 1: The driver was recorded parking, then walking off premises and returning with fast food, 5 mins later. Driver has receipt for using site shop 9mins after parking.

Incident 2: Another day, driver was only recorded parking and walking off premises. Driver has receipt for using site shop 15mins after parking.

Keeper of vehicle received PCN for, parking only whist using site facilities. Keeper used template found in the newbies sticky board but keeper's address was carelessly not added and sent within 28th day appeal timeframe.

Parking firm replied via email after 28th day period, saying Keeper has failed to confirm address provided by DVLA and to provide details for driver. Looking at the evidence, PCN was issued correctly. No POPLA code was attached.

Has the keeper now missed the opportunity to appeal and get POPLA code?

Many thanks

Umkomaas

Which parking firm?

PeterParker123

Private Parking Solutions (london) Ltd

Umkomaas

Send them the missing address (ensure you say it is that of the keeper) - require them to issue you with a POPLA Code to which you are entitled, otherwise you will be making a complaint to the BPA, the DVLA and your MP.

Was the address just omitted from the first appeal? What's happened to the second one?

PeterParker123

Keeper sent appeals for both PCN's with address omitted on both by mistake. Firm emailed back the same reply to both email's on the same day.

Regarding both cases, would you say the strongest argument is grace period? Does it matter that there is footage of the driver with fast food?

Umkomaas

Grace Periods can be a strong point, but there are potentially other stronger ones, like signage - does it warn against leaving the site - do you have your own close up photos of the signs? Are the NtKs PoFA compliant? Does the PPC have the landowner's authority to issue parking charges? Is there a current contract between the PPC and the landowner? And there are others - check out the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #3.

But you do need your POPLA codes before any of the above will come into play at the moment.

Does it matter that there is footage of the driver with fast food?

Who's got 'footage'. How would they know it's you? Are you famous?

Fruitcake

Is there a map or description on the signage detailing the site boundary? If not, how would a driver know that they had left site.

If the driver was allegedly observed leaving site, why didn't the parking weasel stop him/her before they reached the alleged boundary?

As for the address issue, the PPC sent a NTK to The Keeper, therefore they have the name and address of said Keeper from the DVLA.
If The Keeper responded saying they were indeed The Keeper, then it implies that the address is correct, otherwise the NTK would never have reached The Keeper.
They sent a NTK to a named person at a specific address. That person has responded, so whilst The Keeper may not have confirmed their address, neither did they say, this is not my address. The assumption must therefore be made that the address quoted by the scammers is indeed correct and no confirmation is needed.

Complain to the BPA and DVLA that you have been denied a PoPLA code. Complain also to your MP and the MP where the car park is located if different about this unregulated scam.

These are some of the comments made by the MPs in Parliament concerning the unregulated parking industry (Feb 2018):

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

These are the exact words used, so you should quote them to your MP in a complaint and ask him/her to contact Sir Greg Knight MP if he/she wants further information about this scam.

PeterParker123

Thanks for your quick responses.

Will do as you mentioned and email the Keeper's address and request POPLA code.

PeterParker123

Umkomaas wrote: »

Grace Periods can be a strong point, but there are potentially other stronger ones, like signage - does it warn against leaving the site - do you have your own close up photos of the signs? Are the NtKs PoFA compliant? Does the PPC have the landowner's authority to issue parking charges? Is there a current contract between the PPC and the landowner? And there are others - check out the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #3.

But you do need your POPLA codes before any of the above will come into play at the moment.


Who's got 'footage'. How would they know it's you? Are you famous?

On the firms' website they have footage stills of driver leaving vehicle and then returning with food, but walking towards site shop, not back to car. I thought this could be used as proof that the driver used the facilities.

PeterParker123

Fruitcake wrote: »

As for the address issue, the PPC sent a NTK to The Keeper, therefore they have the name and address of said Keeper from the DVLA.
If The Keeper responded saying they were indeed The Keeper, then it implies that the address is correct, otherwise the NTK would never have reached The Keeper.
They sent a NTK to a named person at a specific address. That person has responded, so whilst The Keeper may not have confirmed their address, neither did they say, this is not my address. The assumption must therefore be made that the address quoted by the scammers is indeed correct and no confirmation is needed.

This is was my initial thought. Keeper started email appealing and
disputing charge and saying they were the keeper. The fact that the firm waited till after the 28 days to reply made it seem like it's a loophole they were attempting to not accept the appeals.

The signage had no map, and driver received no warning from person filming.

PeterParker123

Hi everyone, here's an update since the last post.

Keeper sent an email to the firm confirming that they are the keeper of vehicle and that they require them to issue a POPLA Code which was stated on the NtK, otherwise a complaint will be made the BPA, the DVLA and local MP.

The following week keeper received 2 rejection emails with POPLA codes for both incidents, along with stills taken from video footage that the firm refers to as "Photographic evidence".

Keeper went to the site and took pictures of the signage. Entrance sign is obscured and the main signage has no mention/warning that surveillance takes place within the car park and no map/boundary is shown.

(A complaint will be sent to ICO regarding body warn video footage taken without GDPR compliant signage at site).

Also, firm sent a Reminder Notice with the charge going up to full price, via post. It arrived a day before the firm emailed their first reply to the appeal, asking for driver details (As mentioned at the start of the thread).

Here's the first draft for the POPLA appeal which includes all the points above. Would appreciate any feedback.

Ahh newbies can't post links. Is it possible to PM the link to someone who could post it on my behalf? There are lots of photos used that make it quite long.

Thanks