POPLA Appeal

SuperGirl09

I'll search around I might find something!

SuperGirl09

M&B appear to 'manage' of pubs and restaurants.. that being said.. would something like this suffice?

The contract provided has not been signed by the landowner, but rather a managing agent of the site. No further evidence has been submitted to confirm that this managing agent have the authority to act on the behalf of the landowner, especially with regards to entering into long-term contracts with 3rd party companies.

Redx

SuperGirl09 wrote: »

M&B appear to 'manage' of pubs and restaurants.. that being said.. would something like this suffice?

The contract provided has not been signed by the landowner, but rather a managing agent of the site. No further evidence has been submitted to confirm that this managing agent have the authority to act on the behalf of the landowner, especially with regards to entering into long-term contracts with 3rd party companies.

nor does it state their position within the firm, whoever M&B actually is ?

SuperGirl09

You are right! All I know is that they manage the pubs and restaurants under M&B and in this case, the Green Man. Then the signature is on the agreement as 'Jones' and no idea who that is!

SuperGirl09

ECP have only put on that contract - ECP and Euro Car Parks LTD. That is literally it. Then referring to themselves as ECP. So I am wondering now what that even means.

Redx

I wouldnt be worrying about the ECP part, thats easily decided as they are a parking company and on the BPA list and easily found

its the ambiguity of the M&B and job title and nothing flowing from landowner direct to ECP that you call into question

if its not obvious to us, its not obvious to the POPLA assessor either

SuperGirl09

okay

Yes - so I need to word that it is unclear where who holds landowner authority.

KeithP

I just stuck M&B into google and the first item returned was this:

https://www.mbplc.com

Redx

yep, thats what I did earlier, which was why I mentioned them


I believe that the contract should have job title , dates , full contact address etc and any permission to act on behalf of the landowner , os the details of the permissions if M&B are the landowner


not scribbled on the back of a fag packet

SuperGirl09

ECP Evidence pack claims:

1) Insufficient time purchased
2) They have written authority to operate at M&B Car Park
3) Signs are clear

My Response:

1) I note that ECP have not disputed the fact that the alleged 'overstay' was fully covered by BPA guidelines on Grace Periods. Therefore this appeal should be allowed.

To reiterate from my appeal, BPA guidelines state that a grace period of 10 minutes minimum should be given at the end of a parking action and, as Kevin Reynolds of BPA has clarified, no time limit is specified prior to parking action starting or ending, it could be 5 minutes or 10, depending on circumstances. A ticket was purchased within 10 minutes of the arrival time, therefore the first grace period is adhered to. Upon exit, it took 13 minutes so the driver did intend to leave promptly and did so as soon as they were able, given the circumstances which the driver was under in a very busy car park.

2) ECP evidence Figure 4 appendix A, The contract provided is ambiguous as to who has landowner's authority to instruct ECP to act on their behalf. No further evidence has been submitted to confirm who does, especially with regards to entering into long-term contracts with 3rd party companies. It also does not show evidence of the signatory's title and position, contact information or permissions if M&B are indeed the landowners and therefore brings the validity of this agreement into question.

3) ECP's close-up images of signs are very misleading as they do not indicate font size or accessibility to the motorist. As in appeal, areas of car park are unsigned, there were no signs in the proximity of the car and no distances are given on the plan provided. Then the driver is to determine whether they wish to remain in that car park by making a payment to commit to the parking on that land. This is without taking into account the circumstances at which the driver was under in the appeal. All of which may take at the very least 10 minutes.

Any better? Thank you, I know it is late! I am thinking... it said 7 days from 20th does that include tomorrow?