Blue Badge Private Land Little confused

Johno100

mc303 wrote: »

Hi, today via email i received a popla appeal,
Please advise what i should do next and the time scale i have.
Thank you

I take it you mean a POPLA code?

mc303

Lol, i will edit, thank you and yes

Le_Kirk

You now need to submit a POPLA appeal, go HERE for advice.

Fruitcake

Create a PoPLA appeal using all the relevant points from post 3 of the NEWBIES. Post your draft here for checking before you submit it.

Keep up your complaints to the HA/MA.

What did your MP say, assuming they responded?

mc303

my MP along with others was mentioned in a tweet, it has had 1500 engagements it is still being updated, but no replies
and thx for the reply

mc303

Hi, am i on the right tracks? this is my appeal:

1. 2010 Equality Act
2. 2 The Operator failed to deliver a Notice to Keeper in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA)
3. No evidence of Landowner Authority.

1)The Equality Act defines disability in S6.
"A person (P) has a disability if-
(a) P has a physical or mental impairment, and
(b) the impairment has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on P's ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities." the blue badge scheme has no legal relevance on private land and only has a legal standing for on-street parking, where in fact inspection to its validity and correct use can only be carried out by certain personnel, namely police officers and council civil enforcement officers (formerly called traffic wardens). Even these personnel have no powers of inspection and enforcement under current legislation on private land, so in essence your car parking management agents have no legal powers of inspection.

By using various descriptors of different scenarios of parking on private land, the parking company is beaching the Equality Act by discriminating directly, indirectly and discrimination by connection of a disability (using a blue badge is connected to disability).

Service providers (including Housing Associations) are required to provide "reasonable adjustments" for disabled people,
It is not permitted to harass a disabled person

2) The Operator failed to deliver a Notice to Keeper in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA)

In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon, POPLA must first consider whether they are confident that the Assessor knows who the driver is, based on the evidence received. No presumption can be made about liability whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person.

Where a charge is aimed only at a driver then, of course, no other party can be told to pay. I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be), and as there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, it has been held by POPLA on numerous occasions, that a parking charge cannot be enforced against a keeper without a valid NTK.
As the keeper of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4. This applies regardless of when the first appeal was made because the fact remains I am only the keeper and ONLY Schedule 4 of the POFA (or evidence of who was driving) can cause a keeper appellant to be deemed to be the liable party.
.
3) No evidence of Landowner Authority.
The operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice

As this operator does not have proprietary interest in the land then I require that they produce an un-redacted copy of the contract with the landowner. The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including exemptions - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier’s 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do and any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed, generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.

Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in the BPA CoP) and basic information such as the land boundary and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to charge (which cannot be assumed to be the sum in small print on a sign because template private parking terms and sums have been known not to match the actual landowner agreement).
Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:
7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.
7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:
a. the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined
b. any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation
c. any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement
d. who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs
e. the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement

Please find attached a copy of the blue badge

Coupon-mad

Your first point doesn't even say that an occupant of the car had a Blue Badge and the circumstances that happened. POPLA will have no idea unless you tell them.

You need to add the usual long template about unclear signs.

What basis do you have for saying the NTK is not a POFA one? Have we seen it?

mc303

Your first point doesn't even say that an occupant of the car had a Blue Badge and the circumstances that happened. POPLA will have no idea unless you tell them.

This will be corrected

You need to add the usual long template about unclear signs

the vehicle is photographed parked with the sign directly in front of it, should i still pursue this?

What basis do you have for saying the NTK is not a POFA one? Have we seen it?

i must have copied this part and somehow it is within the NTK paragraph, so i need to delete this sentence?
thank you for your reply CM

Fruitcake

mc303 wrote: »

This will be corrected

the vehicle is photographed parked with the sign directly in front of it, should i still pursue this?

i must have copied this part and somehow it is within the NTK paragraph, so i need to delete this sentence?
thank you for your reply CM

Yes you still need to use the signage point. Have you shown us images of them yet so we can advise if/where they fail to meet the BPA CoP?

Your comment previously that, "The Operator failed to deliver a Notice to Keeper in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA)" doesn't explain how it fails the POFA.

Do you mean a NTK was never sent/received, or do you mean one was sent but out of time to transfer liability to the keeper, or do you mean it failed in some other way?
If we don't know what you mean, the assessor won't either.

They need spoon feeding.

mc303

Fruitcake wrote: »

Yes you still need to use the signage point. Have you shown us images of them yet so we can advise if/where they fail to meet the BPA CoP?

Your comment previously that, "The Operator failed to deliver a Notice to Keeper in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA)" doesn't explain how it fails the POFA.

Do you mean one was never sent/received, or do you mean one was sent but out of time to transfer liability to the keeper, or do you mean it failed in some other way?
If we don't know what you mean, the assessor won't either.

They need spoon feeding.

1. no i have not sent the images where can i upload please?
2. i have never received an NTK only an email which i posted here, can you give me some hints on this please?
thank you