Parking Eye - Bloom Street Manchester - POPLA STAGE

Umkomaas

Look at legally qualified expert and regular contributor here bargepole’s concise defence example in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 and work your details into that.

Wait though to see what PE’s next move is. Some of the organisations who contract PE won’t allow them to take their patrons to court. Come back on this thread if/when PE next respond.

Coupon-mad

FuminGuy wrote: »

I'm guessing there is a lot to learn for a court appeal? will my PoPLA appeal be a good foundation or will it need to be completely re-worded and formatted ?

You have the basics in your POPLA appeal and it's winnable on the 11 minutes argument because that's arguably within the spirit of the grace periods required by the BPA, particularly given a DVLA stakeholders' meeting a few years ago where the BPA resolved to change the minimum grace period to...11 minutes (they then never did make that change).

If PE pursue this, your defence would be bargepole's concise defence with this (below) in it as the facts, so really easy to write!

The driver had experienced technical difficulties as the mobile device was unable to download the app due to administrative restrictions (see Fig#3). When attempting to call the Paybyphone number the mobile device ran out of battery. Thus leaving the only other method to purchase parking by cash which the driver did not have on the day in question. Leaving the driver with no other choice other than to leave the site. The length of time this had taken the driver to enter and exit the site is said to be 11 minutes, which is plausible considering they had to find a space, locate the signage and read it (which is dotted around the site), locate the pay station, walk back to the car, operate the phone, attempt to download and try to operate the app or call to purchase parking, consider alternative options and then leaving the site.

This could have potentially been completed within the minimum grace period of 10 minutes however the driver states that it had taken them longer to read the signs and contemplate alternative options to pay for parking on the site. The driver is questioning the accuracy of the ANPR system as it may be configured incorrectly thus resulting in the reported time by ParkingEye alleging that the time taken was in fact 11 minutes.

Here's a ParkingEye case all about an alleged 14 minutes grace:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/74760956#Comment_74760956

Worth reading the whole thread to see his defence, then Witness Statement, then post #110 telling how he won in court.

You can too, as long as you do NOT let any deadlines slip, or this time, you fall!