I hate myself for getting into this mess again

Redx

Plus 10 minutes or more to leave after the parking period ended

Read clause #13 of the BPA Cop , one grace period to do what the driver did

A second grace period of at least 10 minutes at the end of the parking period to leave the car park

Think about it

Dianna67

Redx, you're a star. Thanks v much.

Coupon-mad

You simply need to search the forum for:

POPLA green button on arrival

and separately:

POPLA split grace periods

And copy & adapt a recent one talking about the NCP v HMRC case and setting out the 'on arrival' time in detail then the 'on exist' time taken, as the first point at POPLA stage.

But none of that will matter when you complain to the Hotel about this scam and demand they email PE to cancel it.

Dianna67

Hello again coupon mad,

Thanks for the advice. I'll get that typed up tomorrow. I'll also complain to the hotel and my MP. I wasn't a guest at the hotel tho, I work across the road. But it's a public car park, and I was a "paying" customer at the car park. My 1st and last time to park there!

Thanks
Dianna

Dianna67

So, I have drafted an appeal to POPLA. I am purposely writing in the first person, as I don't want to win this by playing about with keeper/driver ambiguity. I want them to know I was driving and I want to win purely because they were in the wrong.


I was the registered keeper and driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the alleged parking contravention and I deny any wrong doing.


Due to the vagueness of the PCN it is unclear as to what legal basis the claim is brought, whether for breach of contract, contractual liability, or trespass. Overstay and no ticket are mentioned in the generic fine print overleaf; but neither are referenced as the actual reason for the PCN. Either way; I deny any breach of contract and state that no parking contravention took place.
The PCN references my arrival time and my departure time, but nothing about the ticket I purchased that day.
It appears to be based upon images by the Claimant’s ANPR cameras at the entrance and exit to the site. These are merely images of my vehicle in transit, entering and leaving the car park and do not prove that I did not pay for the appropriate parking time.


The facts are that my vehicle, registration XXXXXXX entered the Adelphi Britannia Car Park on 12th November 2019 at 12:30:41. I purchased a ticket via the paybyphone website at 12:41. 10 minutes and 19 seconds later. The Claimant has rounded the official timings off to “4 hours and 10 minutes”, hence an overstay of 10 minutes; which fall within the initial ‘observation period’ allowed by the British Parking Association’s (BPA) Code of Practice (CoP). The expiry time of my ticket was 16:41 and I left the car park at 16:41:28; also within the minimum ten minutes ‘grace period’ allowed by the BPA CoP at the end of the parking period.
The terms and conditions on the signs do not state that a parking session begins at the point of entry.As such, one would assume that the parking session begins upon payment. Therefore; to the best of my knowledge, I fully complied with the car park’s rules.


I deny the contravention due to the alleged overstay being within a reasonable period of time to allow me to enter the site, identify a parking space, locate the nearest sign, note the tariffs, read the terms and conditions, get onto the website, obtain my login and password, enter the site code and required parking time, input my card details and process the payment.
Furthermore there was no misuse of valuable parking space. I parked correctly, not in contravention nor causing an obstruction, and certainly not unauthorised.


Upon receipt of PCN from the Claimant, I appealed and supplied them with evidence that a ticket for 4 hours was in fact purchased, however they have decided to pursue this matter further. If the PCN is relating to a 10 minute overstay than I put it to the POPLA assessors that the Claimant has failed to allow me a sufficient grace period and observation period for both in entry and exit based on the BPA Code of Practice.
A BPA article by Kelvin Reynolds, BPA Director of Corporate Affairs who this Claimant is well aware, is on record as saying “there is a difference between ‘grace periods’ and ‘observation periods’ in parking and that good practice allows for this. An observation period is when an enforcement officer should be able to determine what a motorist intends to do once in the car park. Our guidance specifically says there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket. No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another ten minutes, depending on various factors not limited to disability. The BPA’s guidance on the ‘grace period’ as the time allowed after permitted or paid for parking. The Claimant has ignored this guidance and therefore not abided by it’s own BPA’s code of practice.


Notwithstanding the BPA rules, relevant contract law also dictates that consumers must be given the opportunity to consider terms and conditions before entering a consumer contract. POPLA Assessors have stated in recent decisions that a reasonable time period for this would be up to about ten minutes.
In a recent (02/05/2019) Court of Appeal decision in the case between NCP(Appellant) and HMRC (Respondent) it was made clear that the offer and acceptance of a parking contract can only take place once the payer has inserted payment into the machine and pressed the green button to obtain a ticket. Which in my case, paying by phone would be the point at which I click submit. It is clear from this decision that a contract cannot possibly begin upon driving into the car park, not least because at that point the driver has not had the opportunity to read the terms and conditions of the contract that may or may not be entered into and no time to then purchase a ticket has been allowed.


The case of Thornton vs Shoe Lane also determined that the Parking contract starts when the ticket is purchased.
I also refer you to the case 3JD08399 ParkingEye v Ms X. (Altrincham 17/03/2014) where the judge said that driving around looking for a space does not classify as parking. The judge also thought he would probably be minded to rule that £100 was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss. Therefore, I put the Claimant to strict proof that the sum of £100 (or indeed the discounted £60) are a genuine pre-estimate of loss for the alleged 10 minute overstay.


Furthermore and in the alternative, it is denied that the claimant’s signage sets out the terms in a sufficiently clear manner which would be capable of binding any reasonable person reading them. Some of the terms on the Claimant’s signage are displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a moving vehicle and is in such a position that anyone attempting to read it would be unable to do so easily. And as mentioned above, there is no mention that a ticket must be purchased at the exact moment of entering the site or that alternatively; the driver must calculate the time taken to park and “press the green button” and subtract this time from the time purchased.
I would also question whether the Claimant has sufficient proprietary interest in the land, or that it has the necessary authorisation from the landowner re issuing parking tickets and to pursue payments by means of litigation?


So, to summarise: I entered the car park, parked correctly, carried out my obligations to read the signs, purchased a ticket at a cost of £5.30 via the website for 4 hours and stayed for 4 hours. I monitored the app closely and ensured that I left the car park on time. I did this all in good faith and in no way was I trying to cheat the system.
I therefore ask that you uphold my appeal and cancel this Parking Charge.

Redx

expand on clause #13 of the grace period in the BPA CoP , treating it as two separate items , (split grace periods) the one before parking and the departure one after the parking period has been completed


do not refer to the claimants alleged overstay, because they either ignore one of the periods or lump them together into one, which you do not want, so dont even go there


also insert and/or expand the no landowner authority and poor signage as well, the more the merrier

Dianna67

Thanks a million. I've just done that, so I think it's good to go. wish me luck - ill report back re the decision!

Redx

You may be reporting back regarding their Evidence pack and your rebuttal to be submitted within 7 days if that pack being submitted

So you appear to have missed the next stage , if this goes to the wire

Dianna67

What? So there could be another stage to this saga? I may have to prepare another defence statement? Wont POPLA just see that they are in clear violation of BPA CoP section 13?

Umkomaas

Dianna67 wrote: »

What? So there could be another stage to this saga? I may have to prepare another defence statement? Wont POPLA just see that they are in clear violation of BPA CoP section 13?

POPLA allow the operator to respond to your appeal. You are then shown their response which you can, if you wish, comment on. We strongly advise that you do. You have 7 days to do so, and within 2,000 characters (not words). You cannot add new appeal points at that juncture.

There is no 'defence' required unless/until this gets to a court situation.