Blue Badge Private Land Little confused

mc303

thank you everyone for your help and support (even if i was misunderstanding the replies)
i will now wait the 26 day period as suggested and then copy and paste the template, stating only my name as the keeper.
Thank you

Umkomaas

stating only my name as the keeper.

..... and address if they are asking for it. Do not give them any reason to ignore your appeal based on you not following their full appeals procedure.

And before you query my statement - yes it does and has happened.

mc303

Hi everyone, just a quick Q, am i right in thinking, should i get a popla code from the PPC, then there is another template here that i need to send to popla?
thank you

nosferatu1001

Not a template as such. You will need to read the newbies thread on POPLA appeals, so you can do your research.

Umkomaas

mc303 wrote: »

Hi everyone, just a quick Q, am i right in thinking, should i get a popla code from the PPC, then there is another template here that i need to send to popla?
thank you

Only the PPC can provide you with your POPLA Code - it comes in their rejection of your initial appeal letter.

The NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #3 gives you all the details about appealing to POPLA. There's a bit more to it than simply 'another template'.

mc303

thank you, i recall i helped a friend once with popla and the appeal was successful, is it ok to post the appeal on this thread and see if i can use the same statement for my appeal?
thank you

Umkomaas

mc303 wrote: »

thank you, i recall i helped a friend once with popla and the appeal was successful, is it ok to post the appeal on this thread and see if i can use the same statement for my appeal?
thank you

You can post it here for critique if time allows. Some elements of a previous POPLA appeal might still have some applicability, but there's a danger of regurgitating stuff that is now well out of date.

How 'old' is it?

mc303

Appeal reasons:
Dear POPLA
Appeal verification code xxxxxx xxx PCN number xxxx
I am the registered Keeper of the above vehicle and I am appealing against above charge. I contend that I am not liable for the parking charge on the following grounds and would ask that they are all considered.
1. I require that the contract with the landowner is produced, as xxx are not the landowners and I contend they have no legal standing to pursue this charge.

2. The amount demanded is not a Genuine Pre-estimate of loss.

3. No Valid contract with landowner
It is widely known that some contracts between landowner and parking company have ”authority limit clauses” that specify that parking companies are limited in the extent to which they may pursue motorists. One example from a case in the appeal court is Parking Eye –v- Somerfield Stores (2012) where Somerfield attempted to end the contract with Parking Eye as Parking Eye had exceeded the limit of action allowed under their contract. In view of this, and the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice section 7 that demands that a valid contract with mandatory clauses specifying the extent of the parking company’s authority, I require the parking company to produce a copy of the contract with the landowner that shows POPLA that they do, indeed have such authority.

It has also been widely reported that some parking companies have provided “witness statements” instead of the relevant contract. There is no proof whatsoever that the alleged signatory on behalf of the landowner has ever seen the relevant contract, or, indeed is even an employee of the landowner. I require, if such a witness statement is submitted, that it is accompanied by a letter, on landowner’s headed notepaper, and signed by a director or equivalent of the landowner, confirming that the signatory is, indeed, authorised to act on behalf of the landowner, has read the relevant terms of the contract and is qualified to attest to the full limit of authority of the parking company

4. The amount demanded is not a Genuine Pre-estimate of loss
This parking charge does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore is unfair as defined in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. So the entirety of the parking charge must be a genuine pre-estimate of loss in order to be possibly enforceable. xxx in this case cannot possibly justify £100 as a genuine pre-estimate of loss, if it was why would they offer me a reduction from £100 to £60?. The Office of Fair Trading has stated to the BPA Ltd that a 'parking charge' is not automatically recoverable simply because it is stated to be a parking charge, as it cannot be used to state a loss where none exists.

Parking charges cannot include tax-deductible business costs for running a parking company, such as site signage and maintenance, staff employment, membership fees, postage, etc. It should not be recoverable as it is being enforced purely as a penalty. These PCNs represent the only profit for xxx and it is clear that they cannot be operating at a permanent loss. It would, therefore, follow that these charges were punitive, have an element of profit included and are not allowed to be imposed by parking companies.

This concludes my appeal.
Thank you

Umkomaas

Way out of date. GPEOL has been dead in the water for over 3 years now. Put that into a current POPLA appeal will see an automatic rejection by POPLA.

mc303

ok, thx, i cant seem to find post # 3, what does the post begin with please