Fine for entering wrong vehicle reg

Redx

try the title of a well known QUEEN 1980 hit single , that should bring up a lot of court results


and its not RADIO GA-GA or BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY

Quentin

Not good.

What's your usual score on pop master?!

(Bohemian rhapsody 5 years out/Radio GaGa just 4 years out)

Woody510

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5940013/gladstones-solicitors-and-hx-parking-management-county-court-letter#topofpage

Woody510

Are you sure the reg was put in incorrectly? I typed the reg in numerous times during our incident and not one letter printed on the ticket.

Nixson212

familyguy321 wrote: »

Definitely interested in combining forces! As you said, I'm sure others have been caught out by the same machine. Which paper did you contact?

Do you have the link for the HX parking thread? If not, no worries I can try searching for it.

FG

Cant post links as a newbie, thanks Woody510

The paper was Leicester Mercury, waiting on their reply but your case and mine combined should be interesting to them also would like to know how many others were caught out by this scam machine JUST before they change parking management to Paralell.

Will let you know, or message you privately if paper want details.

May be a WS from me to say same issue occured to me with the same operator at the same car park would help your case?

familyguy321

Redx wrote: »

just looked back and seen that CM stated this when it was noted that no landowner authority had been omitted from the popla appeal , hence why they didnt consider it in their summing up

I have been telling people to use the following for over 5 years on here

NO LANDOWNER AUTHORITY
POOR AND INADEQUATE SIGNAGE
any POFA failures
any BPA CoP failures
Grace Periods
de minimis over key entry issues (miskeying)

etc

the first hurdle a claimant has to get over is their proof of landowner authority

but at least this could be brought up in court (county court) , which is just a few people in a room, with the possible outcome a loss of £175 ( £100 charge plus court and legal fees) - its not as if its jail or the stocks or imprisoned in the Tower dungeon, just a dispute over money, and a judgement and one side owes the other side some money

or the £100 fee is paid now and its over with

its either pay or fight (fight also includes a complaint to J G)

There is 1 more day to either pay the £100 (+ £1.75 credit card fee!) or fight.

I'm struggling to reach a decision as so much effort was put into the POPLA appeal and it hurt to get the rejection. How likely is it that this can win in court given that the only evidence of payment is relying on records from the parking operator who have not been forthcoming with this information so far.

FG

familyguy321

Is this good enough to send to John Gallagher via info@popla.co.uk?

FORMAL COMPLAINT – FAO: MR. JOHN GALLAGHER
REF: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear Mr Gallagher,

I recently appealed a Parking Charge Notice through the POPLA service, and I strongly believe procedural errors have resulted in my appeal being refused. This is a matter of utmost importance to both myself and the integrity of POPLA as an Ombudsman Service. I trust you will look into this matter.

Your assessor, Gayle Stanton, decided that the PCN was issued correctly as my vehicle was parked on site and allegedly failed to pay for parking. I provided substantial evidence to prove that the alleged contravention did not occur and this does not seem to have been read by Gayle. Furthermore, there are factual errors in her supporting rational for her decision. These are detailed below:

1) Gayle states in her summary that I, the appellant, have stated that I made correct payment. This is incorrect. I submitted the appeal as the registered keeper of the vehicle and have not identified the driver anywhere in the evidence pack.

2) Gayle states a site map was provider by the parking operator. This again is incorrect. There was no site map provided in the evidence submitted by the operator. Therefore, there was no way of her knowing where the signage was located.

3) Gayle states the photographs provided by the operator show my vehicle entering the car park at 14:50 and exiting at 17:04. Incorrect once again. The photographs show my vehicle entering at 16:23 and exiting at 17:00.

4) Gayle states 'it looks like there is a contract between the motorist and operator'. There is no evidence of a contract provided by the operator so how can she assume there is one?

5) Gayle states that the terms of the car park were accepted. As highlighted in my evidence pack, there are 3 different versions of the terms and conditions within the car park - how can this be in line with the BPAs Code of Practice (18.3) that states signs must be easy to see, read and understand.

I trust you will look at this serious error and ensure that the correct procedures are applied in review of my case.

familyguy321

Sorry to bump this but really need someone experienced to advise how likely we can win this at court stage?

MistyZ

Okay I'll help to bump up if nothing else.

I'm not experienced but suspect that this one would have a good chance of winning if properly defended.

Thing is, you know this case inside out after all the work you've put in. There's the legal paperwork and ways of framing things to get your head around, but the key facts are currently embedded in your brain. Why not build on this and keep fighting?

Umkomaas

familyguy321 wrote: »

Sorry to bump this but really need someone experienced to advise how likely we can win this at court stage?

Impossible to answer I'm afraid. Court is a lottery. Much will depend on the case the claimant puts forward, how good a defence you make, how things are presented by you and the claimant at the hearing, and which side of the bed the Judge got out of that morning.

What I would say is that most court cases where the forum assists throughout the pre-hearing processes are successful. But no one here will second guess a Judge.