Total Parking Solutions - PCN NtK

KeithP

Yella_Fella wrote: »

It just doesn’t make sense, if I’m appealing as a keeper why do I have to mention bits that relate to what a driver would be involved with.

The parking company are alleging that by parking the car the driver entered into a contract with them. The terms of that contract being the information on the signs.

If the signs are too few, of poor quality, not visible, then a contract between the driver and PPC cannot be in place therefore the driver does not owe the £100 (or whatever the figure is).

Now POFA allows the PPC in certain circumstances to transfer liability to the keeper.

If they do not conform to all the requirements of POFA then the keeper cannot be held liable.

That is why you need to ensure that the NtK does in fact meet all the POFA requirements. If it does not then the keeper wins the PoPLA appeal.

Nothing I have written here should be new to you. It is all spelt out in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

You have at least 30 days to submit your PoPLA appeal.

Yella_Fella

KeithP wrote: »

The parking company are alleging that by parking the car the driver entered into a contract with them. The terms of that contract being the information on the signs.

If the signs are too few, of poor quality, not visible, then a contract between the driver and PPC cannot be in place therefore the driver does not owe the £100 (or whatever the figure is).

Now POFA allows the PPC in certain circumstances to transfer liability to the keeper.

If they do not conform to all the requirements of POFA then the keeper cannot be held liable.

That is why you need to ensure that the NtK does in fact meet all the POFA requirements. If it does not then the keeper wins the PoPLA appeal.

Nothing I have written here should be new to you. It is all spelt out in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky thread.

You have at least 30 days to submit your PoPLA appeal.

Thank you for taking time out to explain this, it made more sense with the reasons. I'm drafting a second one now as it needs to be sent, and I can see the signage section which mentions with links to the Beavis case, as stated in the Newbies section. There's a lot to read on that.

The signs are definitely crap, the £40 fee is mentioned at the bottom of the sign in tiny small print for the company that sent me the NtK. I was at another car park (never realised how many of these operators exist) yesterday late noon by another operator, and they had at least stated 2 hour max stay with the fee, abeilt still smaller but at least alongside the bottom of the max hours stayed bit.

Yella_Fella

As I can't put up a picture link, this is what it states in the letter with the 28 days, and it looks like they are compliant with PoFA...

Important Note:
If, after 28 days beginning with the day after that on which this Parking Charge Notice was served payment has not been made in full, or we have not been provided with the name and a serviceable address for the driver/hirer, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, we do have the right, subject to meeting the requirements of the Act, to recover from the Registered Keeper the amount that remains outstanding. (Only applicable in England and Wales). We have obtained the name and address of the registered keeper of the vehicle from the DVLA for the purposes of enforcing this charge. Such information has been provided in accordance with the Road Vehicles (Registrations and Licensing) Regulations 2002.

Yella_Fella

Signs at the car park itself, the NtK mentions the duration of stay, though PoFA mentions about the duration of parking. So I take this irradicates the section for evidence of parked period? (Its a template from someone else with an NtK from Smart Parking.)

https://ibb.co/d5i5O0

https://ibb.co/mCb3Af

Contrary to the mandatory provisions of the BPA Code of Practice, there is no record to show that the vehicle was parked versus attempting to read the terms and conditions before deciding against parking/entering into a contract.

PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 paragraph 9 refers at numerous times to the “period of parking”. Most notably, paragraph 9(2)(a) requires the NtK to: “specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;”

Smart Parking Ltd’s NtK simply claims that the vehicle “entered [xxx] at [xxx] and departed at [xxx]”. At no stage does Smart Parking Ltd explicitly specify the “period of parking to which the notice relates”, as required by POFA 2012.

Smart Parking Ltd uses ANPR (while failing to comply with the data protection 'ICO Code of Practice' applicable to ANPR) to capture images of vehicles entering and leaving the vast unbounded and unmarked area to calculate their length of stay. Any vehicle passing by will be captured by ANPR. Smart Parking Ltd, however, does not provide any direct evidence of its alleged violation. It is not in the gift of Smart Parking Ltd to substitute “entry/exit” or “length of stay” in place of the POFA
requirement - “period of parking” - and hold the keeper liable as a result.

By virtue of the nature of an ANPR system recording only entry and exit times, Smart Parking Ltd are not able to definitively state the period of parking.

I require Smart Parking Ltd to provide evidence to show the vehicle in question was parked on the date/time (for the duration claimed) and at the location stated in the NtK.

Yella_Fella

I actually forgot to post the above, with that said, 2 hours later. This is my v2, I'll include a link to the PDF if the experts can kindly have a quick look. Most are templates based around the NtK with further images that the operator have attached to the declined appeal. Bearing in mind, since the NtK, operator has changed hands so no further evidence can be obtained or can that still be used?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1g6aj5PrCruM_INGpSCIt6QjvQU6SAXGu/view?usp=sharing

Appeal to POPLA

---

APPEAL RE: PPC Name CHARGE ******/******,*********
CAR PARK **/**/2018, VEHICLE REG: **** ***

As the registered keeper of this vehicle, I received a letter dated xx/xx/2018 acting as a notice to the registered keeper. My appeal to the Operator – Total Parking Solutions Ltd. – was submitted and acknowledged by the Operator on xx/xx/2018 and rejected via a letter dated xx/xx/2018. I contend that as the keeper I am not liable for the alleged parking charge and wish to appeal against it on the following grounds:

1) The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself

2) The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge

3) No evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice

4) No Evidence of Period Parked – NtK does not meet PoFA2012 requirements

5) The ANPR System is Neither Reliable nor Accurate

6) No planning permission from Milton Keynes Council for Pole-Mounted ANPR Cameras and no Advertising Consent for signage

Here are the detailed appeal points.

Yella_Fella

Anyone advise of this is fine based on what I’ve got? I need to submit to POPLA tonight. Many thanks.

KeithP

In post #34 you appear to have resigned yourself to the fact that liability can be transferred to the keeper.

If that's the case, then the operator does not need to show that the appellant is the driver.

It therefore follows that your point to PoPLA "2) The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge" is unnecessary.


Conversely, if you do want to assert that liability cannot be transferred to the keeper, then you need the point "No keeper liability" from post #3 of the NEWBIES thread.


Either way, something needs to change.

Yella_Fella

KeithP wrote: »

In post #34 you appear to have resigned yourself to the fact that liability can be transferred to the keeper.

If that's the case, then the operator does not need to show that the appellant is the driver.

It therefore follows that your point to PoPLA "2) The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge" is unnecessary.

Conversely, if you do want to assert that liability cannot be transferred to the keeper, then you need the point "No keeper liability" from post #3 of the NEWBIES thread.


Either way, something needs to change.

Post #34 is what was on the NtK letter. So basically either remove point 2) in my appeal and add point 3 “No keeper liability” from newbies post #3. Would I be able to remove my point 2) completely or does it need the latter to replace it?

From what Coupon-mad has said, the no Keeper Liability section is mainly for windscreen PCN and/or with NtK that doesn't have the PoFA 2012 wording in which mine does as per post #34. I'll remove my appeal point 2 from the looks of things. I hope that's enough based on signage.

KeithP

If you accept that the NtK is able to hold the keeper liable - as in post #34 you say "it looks like they are compliant with PoFA" - then they don't need to show that the appellant is the driver and therefore your point 2 serves no purpose.

So simply, you either add a new point "no keeper liability" before your point 2, or you remove your point 2.

Yella_Fella

Amended and ready for submitting. The POPLA "Please explain your reasons for appealing against the parking ticket." box only allows 2000 words and a separate "Can you upload evidence to support your position?" upload for evidence. Is it fine to say the initial paragraph and bullet points, then upload a PDF of it all? Is that normal now?