Euro Car Parks - POPLA stage

doodzy2

Hi all, had a great morning reading through the FAQ and I've got a pretty good idea of how to proceed, just wanting some advice on how to strengthen my case.

A bit of background - a Notice to Keeper was received after parking in a car park outside a railway station, owned by Euro Car Parks. This occurred due to the train being delayed as someone on the train needed medical attention - and the driver was delayed by about 40 minutes, meaning the driver was out of the car park 40 minutes after their ticket had expired. The event occurred on the 7/12/18 and NtK was received in 7 days (14/12/18). The keeper appealed immediately, as per the FAQ, and got rejected.

Just want to make sure things are being done correctly, if you would kindly indulge, and would appreciate checking to see if the process is OK:

• - There is can see no contravention in terms of the timing for the NtK?
• - The forum link for no driver liability will be used as the driver is not identified
• - POPLA do not allow extentuating circumstances, so will not be including the fact that there was a delay due to someone else's medical emergency - is this OK?
• - In the email stating the rejection of appeal, there is attached a picture of the signage, which clearly does not comply with the forum post. Is it OK to use this as an argument in the POPLA appeal?
• - Is the 'no evidence of landowner authority' argument valid in this instance?
• - Allowing for a grace period of 20 minutes does not mitigate my parking charge, so this will not be included

I wonder if there is anything else that can be used as well.

Finally, thank you all for your hard work on here! It is most appreciated.

NtK: hxxps://imgur.com/a/HwR0Hqo
Rejection: hxxps://imgur.com/a/qzn6Y37

Many thanks

Fruitcake

Start by editing your post to remove any information about who did what!

Only ever refer to The Driver and The Keeper who are two different people.

There is enough information in your post to identify the driver to the scammers.

Do this before you do anything else.

I doubt that ECP own the car park, merely infest it, but it is possible.

Was this actually at a car park belonging to the station, in other words Railway Land covered by byelaws, or was it a car park near a station?

nosferatu1001

1) Edit your post
The driver must NOT be identified. YOU are the Registered Keeper! Unless they have complied with POFA in which case...
2) what do you mean "in terms of the timing" - if you mean they have met Keeper Liability then there is NO POINT hiding the driver but means that bullet 2 is irrelevant.
3) That is not a mitigating circumstance. That is FRUSTRATION OF CONTRACT
Due to measures outside of the drivers control the train was delayed by 40 minutes, therefore the driver was late returning to the car. No breach of contract is possible, as the contract was voided at the point of frustration. It is not possible for POPLA to decide otherwise, as no charge can be correctly issued when there is no contract See X which ius a signed witness statemenmt as *evidecne* that eh train was delayed. IF you can get OTHER proof of this then do so.
4) Of coruse if the sgnage is rubbish then you use it as an appeal point!
compare it to BEAVIS signs and point out ALL the deficiencies
State the supreme court made clear signage a binding requirement of their decision; as this clearly fails on X, Y, Z accounts POPLA cannnot deny the appeal
5) Yes of course, you always do unless you know they own or lease it
6) You hav2 28 days frmo when it was generated. Do you know when that was? I dont, and unless you use a code checker you wont either...

POsting links is easy - upload to imgur etc, then chqange HTTP to HXXP
We will then change it back
Dont change other parts, add spaces etc. Not needed and makes our job harder.

Fruitcake

NTK timing does not necessarily mean it has met all the other very strict requirements of the PoFA 2012. Check the NTK wording against the relevant parts of the PoFA.

The train being late due to a medical emergency caused a frustration of contract for The Driver/an occupant of the car.

Use all the template points from post 3 of the NEWBIES that are relevant, including the very long inadequate signage point. If their signs don't meet the BPA CoP requirements and are dissimilar to the signs from the Beavis case, then of course you should use them.
Get your own pics as they may show more things in your favour.

Of course you use No landowner authority. It's up to them to prove they have one, not you to prove they don't.

PoPLA codes last about 32 days from the date of issue, not necessarily from when the code was received. Don't miss the deadline.

No to grace periods.

Not relevant land (if byelaws apply) is the strongest appeal point.

doodzy2

Thanks for the pertinent points. I will draft a letter in the coming days and post here to see what you guys think.
Just edited my initial post with some imgur links for you guys to peruse. If there is any identifable information left, please let me know so it can be removed. Any help with the pictures would be appreciated.

By 'in terms of timing', the meaning is that the NtK was received within 28 days of the contravention, but there is some confusion as there was no PCN.

Checked POPLA code - valid for 28 days - shall I send the letter as late as possible?

The frustration of contract is interesting, and unless advised otherwise, I'll use that specific wording as mentioned by Nosferatu and Fruitcake.

The car park was not a railway car park - it was located next to the station.

Any idea how I can get information on delayed trains retrospectively? I tried looking on the National Rail database but it doesn't go before 1st Jan 2019.

Thanks again all, much appreciated.

Coupon-mad

That is a POFA NTK:

https://imgur.com/a/HwR0Hqo

Rejection letter:

https://imgur.com/a/qzn6Y37

ECP do not own any car parks, so your appeal points seem to be evidence of unclear signs, and no landowner authority. Nothing else, except...

POPLA do not allow extenuating circumstances, so will not be including the fact that there was a delay due to someone else's medical emergency

Depends. Were they an occupant pf the car and do they have a medical condition that affects their daily life and is likely to continue, or has continued or remitted/repeated over a 12 month period (past/future, ongoing condition?).

doodzy2

Sorry, I should've been clearer.

The person having the medical emergency was not the driver or the keeper. However, the entire train had to be stopped at a station whilst having to wait for paramedics. The driver was on the train at the time of medical emergency and hence was delayed for this reason.

I guess I would need to find proof of the delay, but as said above, the databases are blank before 1st Jan (sounds like they clear it every month)

Coupon-mad

You can't use mitigation like that anyway, so crack on with the usual POPLA templates from the NEWBIES thread, and ignore ECP if you lose!

Same as all the zillions of other ECP POPLA threads you can search for and read.

doodzy2

Thanks Coupon-mad, will do. Is it not worth mentioning a frustration of contract then, as per the posts above?

Thanks

Fruitcake

doodzy2 wrote: »

Thanks Coupon-mad, will do. Is it not worth mentioning a frustration of contract then, as per the posts above?

Thanks

It won't hurt, but don't expect it to win at PoPLA. A sympathetic judge may take a different view if it went further.

Concentrate on the No Landowner Authority and Inadequate signage points. Get your own pics of the site and signage as already advised.

Complain to your MP about this unregulated scam. You should definitely mention the medical delay of a passenger to him/her. How can it possibly be fair that you are being penalised because a stranger was taken ill?

nosferatu1001

POPLA only cares about if the ticket was correctly issued
Not whether any contract was in palce at the time the ticket was issued because it had been frustrated
They are barely literate and badly trained, so you cant expect too much!

YoU SHOULD raise the Issue of frustration, because it lends your story more credibility. Especially i fyou can get some corroboration of this. It will also expose that POPLA is not fit for purpose, because whiel they consider ONE "legally owed" aspect - keeper liability - they ignore all others.