Unfair parking charge (private company)

beckett1991

I’ve tried to find my first original appeal and can’t get access, my popla appeal I can’t seem to find where to edit my appeal either

Coupon-mad

beckett1991 wrote: »

Soo I’ve had a chat with a friend who works for this particular company and he basically told me they wouldn’t uphold this decision if they didn’t think popla could possibly rule against them soo now I’m really unsure what to do is there any way I could share any photos of evidence with anyone and get another opinion ?

Wait, you asked someone who works for IPSERV what he thought, LOL?!

They will have no clue at POPLA.

So rare are POPLA appeals about that firm (in fact they are a 'commercial arm' of a Local Authority, AFAIK) that when you search the published POPLA Annual Reports for the last 3 years, their name is not even listed. Try it!

This is not a firm with any track record of winning POPLA appeals AT ALL - zilch recorded.

I reckon they will offer 'no contest' to a decent forum POPLA appeal. You have photos and I already said, a line is a line, and they will lose if you do a good POPLA effort.

beckett1991

Thanks for the reply my concern is that I can’t seem to edit my popla or see what I actually wrote to popla also the forum won’t allow me to add photos as I’m a new member it won’t allow me to add links

beckett1991

And yes I did ask him as I didn’t know he worked for them until I got an email from him �� basically I have asked for a freedom of information request on how many fines having been given out due to these badly painted/faded lines

Coupon-mad

You can't see what you sent to POPLA. The only any to get it is to email them for it but you needed to keep a copy, not bung a short appeal into the 2000 character boxes.

At least if you uploaded your photos you will have a chance.

Private firms are not subject to the FOI Act.

Fruitcake

If you have a friend who works for a private parking company, he is not your friend, nor a person who you should ever associate with.
He is a scammer working for a bunch of scammers.
You should have nothing to do with him from now on. He is your enemy. He is scum.

Fruitcake

beckett1991 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply my concern is that I can’t seem to edit my popla or see what I actually wrote to popla also the forum won’t allow me to add photos as I’m a new member it won’t allow me to add links

You can upload redacted images to a web hosting site such as postimages or tinypic or similar. Post the URL here but change https to hxxps and someone here will change it back to a live link.

beckett1991

Okay so here is what Ipserv have wrote to popla
The Appellant received a parking charge notice for being in breach of the Duke street car parks Terms and Conditions.
The Appellant was issued a parking charge notice for being parked outside of the markings of a single marked bay.
The appellant claims that they parked within a fully marked bay.
The appellant has submitted 2 photos of a remnants of an old parking bays that have been burnt away and the 2 very small white marks one being around 10cm and the other residues of a 50cm line whereby the paint has left staining to the concreate which has brakes and small amount of paint residue that was likely unable to be removed when burnt away , as you can see from photos submitted below that had been taken by the Enforcement Officer on the date of contravention there are no bay markings making a single marked bay where the Appellant parked, I would also like you to pay particular attention to the bay marking seen in the photos adjacent to the appellants vehicle, they are bright white fully marked bays indicating solid parking bays which are clearly identifiable as parking bays.
The appellant and all other car park users can see that the bay marking around the car park are clear and precise indicating marked bays and the end of marked bays whereby the lines start and end.
This is formatted throughout the car park as the car park was relined back in October 2018.
As you can see from the evidence provided the appellant has not parked with the markings of a single marked bay, the appellant has breached the Terms and Conditions of the Duke street car park, the appellant I feel did not intentionally park in contravention however, has not read the terms and conditions nor made attempts to fully park with a marked bay. The signage informing the driver of the terms and conditions has been erected on the entrance and in and around the car park which the appellant agreed to when parking within the Duke street car park, within that signage and terms and condition it clearly states all vehicle need to be parked within the confines of a single marked bay and on this occasion the driver/appellant failed to adhere to the terms and conditions. Therefore, this parking charge notice has been issued correctly and the appeal should be refused.
Please see below photos showing clear bay markings indicating fully marked bays along with the appellants vehicle clearly not parked within a marked bay.

Popla have now given me the opportunity to respond to these comments here’s what I have so far,
Regarding my response
I would firstly like to point out that my appeal to Ipserv Is incorrect I appealed on the basis that I was correctly parked, and did not breach there terms and conditions. However in there response to yourselves they have wrote that I appealed on the basis I have a valid ticket.
I would secondly like to add the pictures that their enforcement officer took have clearly only showed a certain angle to the painted lines but it does show a vehicle in the bay behind me which gives a clear indication that other people also believe these to be parking spaces.
in reference to there comments regarding that “not all of the white line can be burnt away but it is clear that they are by the other marked bays “ how can somebody possibly see other marked bays if cars are all parked in them ? furthermore i cannot understand why these markings cannot be painted over in black paint to avoid this ? If they believe there is no possible way to burn these white lines off.
Lastly I would like to draw your attention to the last paragraph in which Ipserv admit they do not believe I intended to park in breach of there terms, I believe this statement alone shows they know the lines are on display and could be seen as a parking space.

Any advice on any more comments I should make would be greatly appreciated thanks for reading sorry it’s a bit long

The_Deep

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP after the election, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT]

Coupon-mad

No, go for this instead (as you admitted who was driving and ruined your best point we could have given you, had you come here before appealing to IPSERV at the start!):



Comments on the evidence:

The operator admits in their ungrammatical desperate scrawl, that there are: ''remnants of an old parking bays that have been burnt away and the 2 very small white marks one being around 10cm and the other residues of a 50cm line whereby the paint has left staining to the concreate which has brakes and small amount of paint residue that was likely unable to be removed when burnt away''(sic).

My response to that:
(a) The photos only show a certain angle to the painted lines but it does show a vehicle in the bay behind me which gives a clear indication that other people also believe these to be parking spaces.

(b) how can somebody possibly see other marked bays if cars are all parked in them? furthermore i cannot understand why these markings cannot be painted over in black paint to avoid ambiguity.

(c) any ambiguity must (by law - as POPLA knows) be interpreted in the way that most favours the consumer. A bay line is a bay line!

The operator also says: ''the appellant I feel...has not read the terms and conditions'' yet they conclude ''...on this occasion the driver/appellant failed to adhere to the terms and conditions''.

My response to that:
Their t&cs are in minuscule font, as is the parking charge on the sparse signs, so they are correct that I couldn't read their t&cs and was misled by them leaving bay lines visible. So, as I couldn't read their t&cs and they admit I didn't, I cannot also be bound by those t&cs. I was entrapped by their faded print on the tarmac, which was much more visible than their small print on a sign.