Contest PCN when no ticket bought because driver was ill

The_Deep

an1179 wrote: »

I don't know who owns the car park unless it is on the notice in really small red writing on a yellow background

Is it? Have you looked?

UKPC are fraudsters.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html


http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/

Guys_Dad

an1179 wrote: »

Response from POPLA

Thank you for your contact regarding your appeal.

I have spoken to my manager regarding the issue with the documents not uploading.

Unfortunately, we will not be able to accept these documents now as it has passed that stage of the process.
We will have to continue with the case progress without the documentation.

Currently, we are awaiting your comments to the operator's evidence.




The UKCP photos are all taken in day light my 'offence' happened in the dark. I have can comment 2000 letters now and I have 4 days. Any help would be gratefully received.

Use your right to comment intelligently. Are you able to introduce your missing points there in refuting the PPC's case?

You can't introduce missed appeal points, but for example, you can legitimately say that the PPC has not provided POPLA with any proof that they can make a charge on motorists with their evidence. Requirement of BPA.

You can comment on the photos being in the light and not in the dark as they have supplied evidence.

etc.

Coupon-mad

Go for the fact that UKPC have failed to show how their signs look in the dark, as your main comment to trash their evidence.

an1179

This the ECP evidence excluding photos, the oly photos taken inthe dark are of the car entering and leaving the car park

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GzyBkAIxquOAaF0uVF7P6fCu_9QDuPVt/view?usp=sharing

an1179

This is my draft so far but it exceeds 2000 characters any help with editing would be gratefully appreciated

Areas of this site are unsigned and not illuminated and there are no full terms displayed clearly indicating non-compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (18.3) which states:“Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. The evidence photo’s provided by ECP are all taken in daylight NOT in the dark
The NtK in question contains two close-up license plate images. The time and date stamp and license plate have been inserted into the underneath (but not part of) the images. In addition, the first image does not even show a vehicle, only an inserted image of the license plate and time stamp. The evidence Fig 1 the vehicle is not identifiable, no number plate is visible on first photograph which is displaying date/time. It is noted that these are the only photographs in the evidence that are taken in the dark and show how poor the visibility was at the time.
BPA CoP 13.4 - There is no record 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;” ECP NtK simply claims that the vehicle “XXXX entered at 20:59 and exited at ”. At no stage does ECP explicitly specify the “period of parking to which the notice relates”. It is not in the gift of ECP 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, Euro Car Parks Ltd are not able to definitively state the period of parking. I require ECP 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

Coupon-mad

Things like this can be done, to chop words out:

The NtK [STRIKE]in question[/STRIKE] contains two close-up VRN [STRIKE]license plate[/STRIKE] images. The time, [STRIKE]and[/STRIKE] date stamp [STRIKE]and license plate[/STRIKE] & VRN have been inserted [STRIKE]into the[/STRIKE] underneath (but not part of) the images. [STRIKE]In addition,[/STRIKE] The first image does not even show a vehicle, only an inserted image of the VRN & [STRIKE]license plate and[/STRIKE] time stamp.

an1179

Still 2078 characters

My evidence failed to upload
Areas of this site are unsigned & not illuminated there are no full terms displayed clearly,indicating non-compliance with the BPA Code of Practice (18.3) which states:“Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms & conditions are,including your parking charges.You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site,so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle.The evidence photo’s provided by ECP are all taken in daylight the signs are not lit at night
The NtK in question contains two close-up VRN images.The time,date stamp & VRN have been inserted underneath (but not part of) the images.The first image does not show a vehicle,only an inserted image of the VRN & time stamp.The evidence Fig 1 the vehicle is not identifiable,no VRN is visible on first photo which is displaying date/time.It is noted that these are the only photos in the evidence that are taken in the dark & show how poor the visibility was at the time
BPA CoP 13.4 - There is no record that the vehicle was parked vs trying to read the terms & conditions before deciding against parking/entering into a contract.PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 para.9 refers numerous times to the “period of parking”.Most notably,para.9(2)(a) requires the NtK to: “specify the vehicle,the relevant land on which it was parked & the period of parking to which the notice relates;” ECP’s NtK simply claims that the vehicle “xxxxxxx entered at 20:59 & exited at 21:29”.ECP does not explicitly specify the “period of parking to which the notice relates”.It is not the right of ECP to substitute “entry/exit” or “length of stay” in place of the POFA requirement - “period of parking” - & hold the keeper liable as a result.By virtue of the nature of an ANPR system recording only entry & exit times,ECP are not able to definitively state the period of parking.I require ECP to provide evidence to show the vehicle in question was parked on the date/time (for the duration claimed) & at the location stated in the NtK

waamo

Don't quote what the Code of Practice says just which section it breaches. They have the Code in front of them.

Snakes_Belly

When you comment to the operator's evidence can you upload the photo's then? From memory I think that I could with the IAS appeal. With my appeal to IAS it went on like a game of tennis. At least it wasted their time if nothing else.

FYI, I have used the Vine case in my defence (hat tip to CM). Hopefully you will not have to get to that stage.

an1179

Snakes_Belly wrote: »

When you comment to the operator's evidence can you upload the photo's then? From memory I think that I could with the IAS appeal. With my appeal to IAS it went on like a game of tennis. At least it wasted their time if nothing else.

FYI, I have used the Vine case in my defence (hat tip to CM). Hopefully you will not have to get to that stage.

I have got 2000 characters only. I don't know why my Information and Evidence didn't upload