Premier Park ticket appeal went to POPLA and was rejected

dexterrescue

Hello experts, I WISH so badly I had found this site before sending off my POPLA appeal. I've essentially done everything wrong; I've admitted I am the driver owner, I admitted I did see the signs and my appeal was based on the ipad system to record my vehicle registration not recording my vehicle correctly. POPLA have rejected my appeal which included receipts proving I was in the pub where I was given the ticket (transcript below). At this late stage is there ANYTHING I can do to get out of this charge (£100)?? Happy for you to respond with a flat "NO" if that is the reality and I will have to learn my lesson and remember to read everything here before appealing future tickets...

POPLA TRANSCRIPT:


Decision

Unsuccessful


Assessor Name

Jamie Macrae


Assessor summary of operator case


The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to the appellant due to unauthorised entry/parking.


Assessor summary of your case


The appellant states they were visiting the pub situated at the site. The appellant says they have provided photographic evidence of the time they were there. The appellant says they used the iPad to register their vehicle, but it does not seem to have registered. The appellant says they live in Pinner so they have no reason to abuse the car park. In support of their appeal, the appellant has provided evidence of a purchase at the pub situated at the site.


Assessor supporting rational for decision


I am satisfied that the appellant is the driver and as such, will be considering their liability for the PCN. The signage at the site states “…All customers must be registered at the bar on arrival, for the duration of their stay. Please have your vehicle registration to hand…If you enter or park on this land contravening the above terms and conditions, you are agreeing to pay: Parking Charge Notice (PCN) £100”. The operator uses cameras to capture the registration number of cars entering and exiting the car park. I have checked the photographs, and I can see from the timestamp the appellant was at the car park for one hour 21 minutes. Having reviewed the photographic evidence provided by the operator, I am satisfied there are sufficient signs placed at the entrance and throughout the site displaying the terms and conditions offered with a helpline number to use if a motorist needs assistance. The operator issued a PCN to the appellant due to unauthorised entry/parking. The appellant states they were visiting the pub situated at the site. The appellant says they have provided photographic evidence of the time they were there. The appellant says they used the iPad to register their vehicle, but it does not seem to have registered. The appellant says they live in Pinner so they have no reason to abuse the car park. In support of their appeal, the appellant has provided evidence of a purchase at the pub situated at the site. The operator has provided evidence a system generated print out that shows a search for the appellant’s vehicle registration on the date of the contravention. The search shows the appellant’s vehicle registration does not appeal within their systems. I do not dispute the appellant was a genuine customer of business situated at the site, however, the terms and conditions apply to all motorists that wish to use the site. It is the duty of the appellant to ensure that when they have entered a car park that they have understood the terms and conditions before deciding to park. On this occasion by remaining parked at the site the appellant accepted the terms and conditions. As they did not register their vehicle to park at the site, they did not adhere to the terms and conditions. As such, I conclude that the operator issued the PCN correctly.


PREMIER PARK POPLA TRANSCRIPT:

The vehicle entered the site at 16:17 and exited at 17:38. We are unable to trace an entry on the kiosk or a permit for the Appellant’s vehicle registration. Please see ‘Other Evidence’. The Appellant states “We were visiting the pub which the car park is for. We have provided photographic proof of the time we were there. We used the ipad at the bar to register our car but it doesn't seem to have registered correctly. We live in Pinner and so have no reason to abuse the car park. We were there for 1.5 hours.” This car park is monitored by Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras which take a time and date stamped image of the vehicle on entry and exit and measures the time the vehicle was on site. This is then cross referenced with the data from the kiosk in the bar and the virtual permit system. The main requirement for parking in this car park is that the full, correct vehicle registration is entered into the kiosk or permit system to authorise parking. The Appellant failed to do this, on this occasion. The signage on site clearly states ‘Queens Head Customer Parking only’ and ‘All Customers must be registered at the bar on arrival, for the duration of their stay’. The Appellant has not denied seeing the signage. We cannot be held liable for the Appellant failing to see, or ignoring, the signage. We note the Appellant’s evidence; however, we would advise that this does not constitute proof that the vehicle was authorised to remain on site for 1 hour and 21 minutes without adhering to the terms and conditions of parking. The Appellant has failed to provide any evidence to Premier Park or POPLA to prove that they were authorised to park on site for 1 hour and 21 minutes without adhering to the terms and conditions displayed on the signage. We can confirm that we have not received any contact, or cancellation request, from our client regarding this PCN. When entering onto a managed private car park, a motorist might enter into a contract by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage at the site sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. Therefore, upon entry to the car park, the driver should have reviewed the terms and conditions before deciding to park. 13 Grace periods – according to the British Parking Association Code of Practice 13.1 If a driver is parking without your permission, or at locations where parking is not normally permitted they must have the chance to read the terms and conditions before they enter into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be bound by your parking contract. 13.2 If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes. 13.4 You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes. If the Appellant felt, for any reason, that they were not able to adhere to the terms and conditions, then they would have had sufficient opportunity to choose not to park and depart the site. The Appellant remained parked on site and ultimately, the motorist failed to keep to the conditions of the contract formed. An unauthorised entry/parking of 1 hour and 21 minutes occurred and a Parking Charge Notice was issued. It is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that they have read and parked in compliance with the terms and conditions. On this occasion, the Appellant did not. We request that the Appellant's appeal be refused.

Umkomaas

I won’t be trying to read those walls of text you’ve dumped there, but the result is clear, so reading unlikely to change anything.

Have you complained to the pub and ask them to try to get this cancelled on behalf of a customer? If they won’t help, hit their TripAdvisor/Facebook/Twitter pages and launch a broadside to provide future customers the opportunity to take their business elsewhere.

You do know that the POPLA decision is not binding on you, so there is no requirement to pay this. Only a Judge can tell you to pay. Come back if you get a Letter Of/Before Claim or real court papers from the PPC or their solicitors.

dexterrescue

Huge thanks for super fast response there Umkomaas and apologies for the text dump..

I'm gonna go with the pub facebook, twitter, tripadvisor approach and see if I can guilt the pub into getting involved. They say on their website that all their staff are warned to strictly NEVER get involved in parking matters because it is outsourced to the Premier Park morons.

I will wait for a court request and see what happens. My anxiety around a further increased fine had me just about to pay the £100....

Coupon-mad

There is no fine.

Even if you lost in small claims court, the court fees add just another fifty quid, and we win 99% of cases here. Do the sums! UNLIKELY TO COST YOU ANYTHING.

So not something to get anxious about and pay a 3 figure sum for until a Judge tells you to, given there is no CCJ risk, nothing bad even if a person lost at a hearing in the end.

This is why we do what we do here.

dexterrescue

You guys are awesome. Thanks so much Coupon-mad. Your response has cheered me up no end.