Parking Ticket for accidentally overstaying

ITGuy90

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The BPA will need attachments - the PCN & proof you appealed, plus the Final Notice. And add that you consent for the BPA to discuss your complaint with the parking firm.

If I screenshot the website when I try and appeal again and it says I have, would that be enough? I have no other proof.

Coupon-mad

Yes that's proof of appeal.

Just email Steve Clark at the BPA, although you will probably get the answer that ECP already rejected the appeal:

steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

Not that it matters if knocked back with no POPLA avenue; you won't be paying anything as I hope you know from reading POPLA lost threads galore. No-one pays ECP.

ITGuy90

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes that's proof of appeal.

Just email Steve Clark at the BPA, although you will probably get the answer that ECP already rejected the appeal:

[EMAIL="steve.c@britishparking.co.uk"]steve.c@britishparking.co.uk[/EMAIL]

Not that it matters if knocked back with no POPLA avenue; you won't be paying anything as I hope you know from reading POPLA lost threads galore. No-one pays ECP.

Thanks for your help with this, I'm just gathering the documents together now to send to just Steve (and not DVLA as well anymore if I understood that correctly).

I'm still finding my way around the website so didn't see the section about POPLA lost, so this means even if I don't get my POPLA code I'll be OK?

Coupon-mad

There is no section about POPLA lost.

I meant search the forum for those keywords on this board only, and change the default to SHOW POSTS. Searching the forum is the one thing many newbies should do more.

ITGuy90

BP have come through and got me a second POPLA code. However it says on it I have 14 days to pay £100 or "further charges may apply". I'm just wondering now what the best way to send the POPLA appeal would be, but I am reluctant to discuss it in present company.

nosferatu1001

the best way to send a POPLA appeal is the only way you have - you submit it or you dont

Is the 14 day threat in the same commiuncation as the new code for POPLA? If so you MUST complain to the BPA; they are enjoined under the CoP from taking ANY actions while an appeal is underway. As you have 28 days merely to lodge the appeal, 14 days is obviously well inside this appeal.

Not sure who you refer to with the last comment.

ITGuy90

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

the best way to send a POPLA appeal is the only way you have - you submit it or you dont

Is the 14 day threat in the same commiuncation as the new code for POPLA? If so you MUST complain to the BPA; they are enjoined under the CoP from taking ANY actions while an appeal is underway. As you have 28 days merely to lodge the appeal, 14 days is obviously well inside this appeal.

Not sure who you refer to with the last comment.

The thing is the BPA must have seen it because they forwarded me the new letter! The present company thing is the BPA, Steve has seen all of this.

Umkomaas

Check out the code expiry date here.

https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla-code-checker/

If it's only 14 days, fire off another complaint.

Coupon-mad

ITGuy90 wrote: »

BP have come through and got me a second POPLA code. However it says on it I have 14 days to pay £100 or "further charges may apply". .

No, they won't, because even people who lose at POPLA here, NEVER pay ECP.

I think you haven't read any ECP POPLA appeal threads yet, if you were worried about a silly hot air threat of 'more costs' that CANNOT be added to the £100. And ECP never sue anyone, anyway.

This is something & nothing, so crack on and show us the POPLA appeal - yes, in this thread, and who cares if it's won or not?

I hope it is (less worry for you) but you won't be paying money to this PPC.

Glad to see Mr Clark sorted out a POPLA code for you anyway, may as well try by reading tons of other similar threads from 2018 and giving POPLA a go.

ITGuy90

OK, here is what I have so far. You probably can't see it here because I copied from a RTF editor but I highlighted some areas I was unsure of or need more adding so I am writing that bit first to make it stand out as unfinished/needing more input.



Signage at paid car parks - I need to get the pictures yet.
Improper ANPR transparency - pictures again
Grace period - pictures / repeats something I already said but I still feel applies to it.
Frustration of contract as per https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/popla/

---

I (the registered keeper of vehicle NNNNNNN) contest the PCN (BBBBBBBB) issued DDMMYYYY on the following grounds.


Note: I exercise my right not to disclose the identity of the driver.




Euro Car Parks has no Authority to issue tickets on the land:
I question whether the parking company Euro Car Parks has the right to issue tickets on the land. Euro Car Parks have not provided any evidence it is in a contract with the land owner and therefore cannot issue tickets.
Note BPA Code of Practice section 22.16b indicates if used, a witness statement must also be signed by the representative of the landowner or his agent or is invalid.


Further to this point I also demand to see a copy of the current contract for this car park on the basis that sometimes parking company contacts do not allow charges to be made to first time offenders and cite BPA Forum Minutes of 3rd November 2015:
Kate Maisey from Tesco provided the following information to the BPA Forum Tesco car parks are there for customers; their focus is often different to other organisations. They are seen as more lenient than other operators, taking no action on the first offence, only on the second or third offence via an operator. The operator they contract must follow Tesco rules for customer service as it is important toTesco that the customers return. Tesco’s main business is selling items in their stores not parking.


Proof of contract of authority is required.


Notification to keeper is invalid:
Schedule 4 paragraph 7 of the PoFA stipulates a set of mandatory information.
The notification to keeper does not identify the creditor and I further submit the company Euro Car Parks has no authority to issue PCNs on this land as they have not proved they have a valid contract with the land owner nor has the creditor been identified i.e. the person legally entitled to the money.




Signage at paid car parks:
In car parks where a ticket is purchased from a machine, only the terms and conditions on the machine itself are binding to the motorist. This set of terms and conditions are those binding to the motorist. Any other signs of a contradictory or different nature (e.g. one that adds/changes conditions) elsewhere in the carpark make no difference to the contract the motorist has made.


<images of machine>


Inadequate signage:
The BPA Code of Practice section 19.3 states the terms and conditions and charges must be shown clearly and fully to the driver. The following images are of the signs in the carpark the alleged offence took place and as you can see are not clear and not fully readable so no contract has been formed with the driver.
<see image(s)>


Improper ANPR Transparency:
Section 21.1 of the BPA Code of Practice state: The signage must indicate transparently how ANPR data is being used i.e. the signage should state the timing is from the point of entry and exit to the car park – if that is not done then how could a motorist have reasonably known this? The signs do not.


Furthermore the use of ANPR only indicate alleged time of entry and exit and not a true reflection of how long the car has been parked (i.e. does not account for the time taken to enter the car park, find a parking space, park, exit the vehicle, walk to the ticket machine, get money out, purchase the ticket, walk back to the car, place the ticket in the windshield and exit the car park on foot – followed by entering the car park on foot, walking to the vehicle, unfogging windows, pulling out of the space, finding the exit to the car park, queueing to exit the car park and leaving – all of which could reasonably take up to 20 minutes.


The PCN is a penalty.
PCN is unreasonable and not a valid genuine pre-estimate of loss and is therefore a penalty which contravenes 19.5 and 19.6 of the BPA Code of Practice:
As it has already been proven by the notice to keeper, a ticket was purchased and no proof has been provided of any commercial or reasonable loss. Charges which count as penalties include underpaying in a car park where by paying the vehicle is fully entitled to be there – it has already been established a ticket has been purchased.
Payment on sign indicates £0.60 per hour. 20 minutes does not equate to a loss of £100.
Note: In the case of ParkingEye Vs Cargius it was held that the Beavis case did not apply since parking was paid for rather than free for a limited period. The judge distinguishes it by reasoning that in Beavis the charge was justifable as it was their only income, whereas in a paid car park, only the hourly charge is being lost by overstaying (e.g. £2); anything above that is clearly a penalty.


Grace Period.
Use of ANPR only indicate alleged time of entry and exit and not a true reflection of how long the car has been parked and does not allow for a minimum of 10 minutes grace period (i.e. does not account for the time taken to enter the car park, find a parking space, park, exit the vehicle, walk to the ticket machine, get money out, purchase the ticket, walk back to the car, place the ticket in the windshield and exit the car park on foot – followed by entering the car park on foot, walking to the vehicle, unfogging windows, pulling out of the space, finding the exit to the car park, queueing to exit the car park and leaving – all of which could reasonably take up to 20 minutes.


Frustration of Contract
The driver in question was not able to return to the vehicle in the allotted time through unforeseen events outside of his/her control by means of being in a queuing system in a medical facility which took a lot longer than reasonably anticipated.