Lost POPLA Appeal

Spy_Bee

So I lost my appeal

The appellant has not identified as the driver of the vehicle on the day of the parking event. In this case, the appellant is a company, COMPANY XYZ, and the driver of the vehicle is using the vehicle as a company car. Companies are responsible for the actions of their agents. As this is a company car provided to the driver for the purposes of carrying out their duties, I will be considering whether Healthcare Matters is responsible for the charge as principal on behalf of their agent, who was driving the vehicle and is not known 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: “PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY. HOSPITAL PATIENTS AND VISITORS (INCLUDING BLUE BADGE HOLDERS) MUST OBTAIN A PERMIT ON A TOUCH SCREEN AT RECEPTION. If you breach the above terms you will be charged £75”.

The operator has provided photographic evidence of the appellant’s vehicle, entering the car park at 11:47, and exiting at 12:26, totalling a stay of 39 minutes. The operator has provided evidence to demonstrate that the appellant did not register for a permit.

The appellant explains that the operator has provided no evidence that they have authority to issue PCN’s on the land in question. I acknowledge the appellants comments and have reviewed the operators evidence pack. The operator has provided a signed statement to show it does have authority on the land in question. It states the land and is signed by the land-owner themselves. I will acknowledge that there is no end date but usually this does not matter as the contract will continue rolling until the land-owner advises it has been terminated. On the balance of probability, I find that the document is sufficient to show that the operator does have authority to issue PCN’s on the land in question.

The operator has also provided an exemption list to show that the appellants vehicle did not register for a permit on the day of the breach. POPLA’s remit is to assess the validity of the PCN, as the appellant did not register for a permit, I must advise 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 by failing to register for a permit. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal. I note the appellant has raised further grounds of appeal in the motorist comments, as these were received after the initial appeal, I cannot take them into account.

Truth is that our engineer entered through the back door and missed the signs. We appealed to our customer (a hospital) to quash the fine and we didn't hear back.

The authority was not signed by two people, it was signed by one person, with no job title and no expiry date. Not sure how they decided that was acceptable.

I'm new to all this, so I hope this thread is right and I appreciate any advice given.

Spy_Bee

I should mention, this is Civil Enforcement.

Redx

You should also split that text into readable paragraphs if you want us to read and digest it , most regulars here won't read unedited walls of text , including me

Thank you

Spy_Bee

Edited and highlighted key part in bold.

Spy_Bee

Any ideas on what the next steps are here? I presume that I am going to have to go to court... would I definitely win, considering the discrepancies in the authority document?

waamo

The next step is indeed to prepare for court. The earlier you start preparing the easier it will be. It could be many months away yet so don't panic.

Umkomaas

Wait to see if CEL issue court proceedings then defend if they do. They quite often do.

No one can tell you that you will definitely win. Many do win with forum help, but no guarantees.

Have you asked the landowner to intervene and get the charge cancelled?

Redx

Spy_Bee wrote: »

Any ideas on what the next steps are here? I presume that I am going to have to go to court... would I definitely win, considering the discrepancies in the authority document?

There are several hurdles before an actual court hearing , including the claimant paying the mcol fee and then a court fee

So nobody can say how far it will go due to these stages , plus nobody can assess your case and give you odds , some have poor cases and win , some have good cases and lose , like Beavis

Speculation is for the foolish or ill informed

Just ensure you understand the process by reading and by research

Spy_Bee

I have contacted POPLA for a copy of the "evidence" that was supplied by Civil Enforcement. I didn't realise that if I lost I wouldn't be able to download it from the portal. They've responded saying I will have it in the next month.

In terms of preparing for court, what else do I need to do? Thanks for any advice.

Umkomaas

In terms of preparing for court, what else do I need to do? Thanks for any advice.

Read plenty of other court cases here, especially CEL ones. Do a forum search** on keywords CEL court and read most recent ones. Learn how defences and Witness Statements are constructed.

The NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2 runs you right through the whole court process from the Letter of Claim (which will be CEL's first indicator that they intend to sue) to the actual hearing (if it gets that far).

Learn about the Consumer Rights Act (CRA 2015) and the Abuse of Process in the thread by beamerguy and the one by CEC16. The more you know and understand the better your chances of killing this off - but even if CEL were to act today, it would be at least 3 months before this gets to a hearing - but no room for complacency, start your prep soonest.

** HOW TO USE THE FORUM SEARCH FUNCTION:

Hit your 'Back' button to get back to the forum thread list. On the bar just above the threads you'll see the 'Search' function. Click on the 'Advanced Search' button and on the following page place your keyword(s) in the 'Search By Keyword(s)' and make sure the 'Show Results As' button (at the foot of the window) is changed from 'Threads' to 'Posts'.

HOW TO FIND A THREAD BY A PARTICULAR USERNAME:

If you wish to find posts by a particular poster, follow the above, but use the 'Search by Username' box to input their username.

The_Deep

Have you read this

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles/nhs-patient-visitor-and-staff-car-parking-principles

Is it relevant and if so has the PPC complied.?

Many judges are of the opinion that a claim for failing to enter a VRN in a distant terminal is a waste of court time, and, whatever PoPLA may say,not a BOC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_minimis

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

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][/FONT]