FISTRAL BEACH, Newquay, Inital Parking.. please help!!

MinnieSox9

i have submitted two appeals, for each NTK, and I did spell out clearly and count the number of days in regards to the PoFA non compliance, this is I think really the only grounds i could possible win my appeal on

MinnieSox9

sorry, Keith, im not 100% sure the date in which it was recieved due to shifts and working away at the moment, the date on the letter states the 2nd, and when checking the length of the POPLA code, it is valid until tomorrow

Coupon-mad

They work for 32 days, so you have the weekend too. The NEWBIES thread tells you that you have longer than the claimed 28 days so this is not news to anyone on the forum.

I hope you've not appealed on a a single point only, which the NEWBIES thread post #3 (all about POPLA, answering ALL your questions!) tells you never to do?

KeithP

MinnieSox9 wrote: »

sorry, Keith, im not 100% sure the date in which it was recieved due to shifts and working away at the moment, the date on the letter states the 2nd...

That's fine, but you did say earlier that you received it on 2nd, which was why I queried it...

MinnieSox9 wrote: »

I received the letter on the 2nd august,

Fruitcake

MinnieSox9 wrote: »

i have submitted two appeals, for each NTK, and I did spell out clearly and count the number of days in regards to the PoFA non compliance, this is I think really the only grounds i could possible win my appeal on

I hope you put the invalid contract/no landowner authority as point 1 as requested in addition to all the other template points available from post 3 of the NEWBIES.

MinnieSox9

Hi, I have just received my POPLA appeal decision back... they are rejecting my appeal 😭

This was the response -

“ Assessor supporting rational for decision
The appellant has identified as the driver of the vehicle on the day of the parking event. As such, I am considering the appellant’s liability for the PCN, as the driver. When entering onto a private car park such as this one, any motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage in place sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage in place in the car park, which states: “Parking Tariffs Apply. Motorists must enter their full, correct vehicle registration when using the payment machine…Failure to comply with the terms & conditions may result in a Parking Charge of: £100.00”. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the appellant’s vehicle, entering the car park at 17:06, and exiting at 18:29, totalling a stay of 1 hour 22 minutes. The operator has provided evidence to demonstrate that The appellant explains that the NTK sent by post fails POFA 2012. I note the appellants comments and have reviewed the NTK, I must point out that it does comply with POFA, only just, the breach date is 3 July, as stated in POFA the 14 days starts the first working day after the breach, as such the appellant has confirmed this was received on 18 July, day 14. She states there is no grace period on site. I must advise that the operator does offer a 10 minute grace period at the end of the parking event as per the BPA code of practice, it also offers a grace period at the start of the parking period to allow motorists time to decide if they wish to be bound by the terms of parking, the appellant has not made it clear why she believes the operator has not adhered to this. She states the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is the driver. I note this and advise that it has authority to pursue the registered keeper of the vehicle unless the drivers name and address is provided to it, I note this has not happened. She states there is no evidence of land owner authority. I have reviewed the operators evidence pack and it has provided a copy of land owner authority, this states the site it operates on and is also signed by both parties, I find this sufficient to illustrate the operator has authority to issue PCN’s on the land in question. She states there is no evidence of period parked. The ANPR cameras on site show the entrance and exit times which is sufficient to illustrate the time the appellant was on site for, I note the appellant has not contested the time she remained on site. She states the images contained in the PCN are non-compliant. I have reviewed the PCN and find that it does comply with POFA, it sets out the entrance and exit times and page 2 shows the ANPR images. She states that Cornwall council have not given planning permission for the pole mounted ANPR cameras. I acknowledge this but it is not within POPLA’s remit to investigate planning permission, just the validity of the PCN. The appellant may be better off speaking with the council in regards to planning permission. The appellant has not stated at any point whether a parking ticket was purchased on the day of the breach, the operator has provided evidence to show that the appellant did not purchase a parking ticket, as such I must conclude that the PCN was issued accordingly. I have reviewed the operators evidence pack and it has provided images of the appellants vehicle entering and exiting the site. It has provided images of the signage on site which are clear, legible and evenly spread, this sets out the terms of parking and the PCN amount if the terms are not met. Whilst I appreciate the appellants grounds of appeal, I must refuse the appeal for the reasons stated above. I acknowledge the appellant’s comments, however when looking at appeals, POPLA considers whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract. POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. Ultimately, it is the motorist’s responsibility to comply with the terms and conditions of the car park. Upon consideration of the evidence, the appellant did not comply with the terms and conditions due to unpaid tariff time As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal.”

Gutted!!

MinnieSox9

I really did believe I was going to be lucky based on the POFA compliance ! But obviously not! I did 2 appeals, so I’m waiting to hear back on the second one. Really don’t have £200 to pay but, I tried !

MinnieSox9

Any advice I’d be grateful !

Funnily enough I have this week taken another trip to cornwall and have visited Fistral Beach and there is now SOOO much more signage for parking its ridiculous

Coupon-mad

MinnieSox9 wrote: »

I really did believe I was going to be lucky based on the POFA compliance ! But obviously not! I did 2 appeals, so I’m waiting to hear back on the second one. Really don’t have £200 to pay but, I tried !

You won't be PAYING. what part of 'try POPLA' tells you to pay, on this forum?

:eek:

Just because POPLA tell you that you should, doesn't mean you have to, at all. No-one here pays just due to losing at POPLA stage.

NO-ONE.

And the Assessor is wrong:

I must point out that it does comply with POFA, only just, the breach date is 3 July, as stated in POFA the 14 days starts the first working day after the breach, as such the appellant has confirmed this was received on 18 July, day 14.

That is day 15.

You need to complain to POPLA that the Assessor's maths is clearly wrong.

Umkomaas

The appellant has identified as the driver of the vehicle on the day of the parking event.

Where has the assessor got that from? You didn’t show us your POPLA appeal - did you say anything in that like ‘I parked’, ‘I didn’t see the signs on driving in to the car park’ (or similar)?

I wholly agree with Coupon-mad that, yet again - too frequently to have any further confidence, POPLA just doesn’t understand the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4).

Did you spell out the PoFA time window in your appeal, as Fruitcake laid out for you very early on in your thread?