Stopping not parking

KeithP

Paul_Parker said:

FOA...

What's that?

Surely you mean FAO, but why not in full?

Paul_Parker

KeithP said:

Paul_Parker said:

FOA...

What's that?

Typo: "FAO" ("For the Attention Of"). Too late to fix it, now.

Paul_Parker

Paul_Parker said:

I have today sent the following, via POPLA's complaint form:

[...]

So far, I have had nothing back from POPLA, not even an automated acknowledgement; I have just sent a prompt via the same online form.

Fruitcake

Paul_Parker said:

Ralph-y said:

 CoP consultation

What's that?

Pease read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same. You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

Umkomaas

Paul_Parker said:

Paul_Parker said:

I have today sent the following, via POPLA's complaint form:

[...]

So far, I have had nothing back from POPLA, not even an automated acknowledgement; I have just sent a prompt via the same online form.

They might currently be sweating on it. They don't easily or readily admit to error.

Paul_Parker

Umkomaas said:

They might currently be sweating on it. They don't easily or readily admit to error.

It would be foolish of them to assume that I'll just go away. Anyone know any journalists interested in POPLA stories?

Coupon-mad

No, they are more interested in the new CoP that will replace all this, and that should be your focus this month!

Please now make a real difference.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

Paul_Parker

I chased POPLA by 'phone; they said they had not received my complaint, and asked me to email it to them.
I did, and four days later received their response:

#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#

Your complaint about POPLA

Thank you for your emails which was passed to me by the POPLA team as I am responsible for responding to complaints.

I note from your correspondence that you are unhappy with the decision reached by the assessor in your appeal against ParkWatch/Defence Systems Ltd.

POPLA is an impartial and independent appeals service and we do not act either for the parking operator or the appellant. It is important to explain that it is not our remit to source evidence and documents from either party in support of their submission and our decisions are based on the evidence received from both parties at the time of the appeal. We cannot consider further evidence after the appeal has been completed.

You state that the adjudicator declares that the driver will not be granted a grace period in this instance. You advise that it is not the adjudicators gift to decide that the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice which mandates grace periods, does not apply.

You explain that the adjudicator acknowledges your observation which is backed by timestamps on the images provided by ParkWatch that the entire incident, in which time the vehicle did not park, lasted less than a minute well within any grace period.

I acknowledge your comments, however, the BPA Code of Practice states in section 13.4: “Unauthorised motorists will not be entitled to the minimum time period of 5 minutes for a consideration period in spaces designated for specific users e.g Blue Badge holders, pick up/drop off or where parking is prohibited such as hatched areas in front of emergency exits, or on entry and exit ramps etc”.

In this instance, the vehicle was observed stopping in a no stopping area. The signage in the area confirms that any the area is a no stopping parking or waiting area. See below:

[image]

Further, the images taken of the vehicle at the time of the parking event show that the area has red cross hatching on the floor and NO STOPPING. See below:

[image]

The Parking Charge Notice (PCN) was issued for “stopping in a no stopping area” so it is irrelevant whether you consider the vehicle to have parked or for how long the incident took. The fact remains that the vehicle stopped in a no stopping area while the passenger exited the vehicle and as such, the terms and conditions of the site have been breached and as such, the assessor is correct the state that a consideration/grace period is not applicable in this instance.

You advise that the adjudicator overlooks ParkWatch own statement that it does not allege that the vehicle parked. You state that the adjudicator relies on the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 which relates to parking and not stopping which are different in law.

You state that no Parking Charge Notice can apply of the vehicle is not parked and as such, the adjudicator had no choice but to decide as keeper, you have no liability.

The assessor has confirmed in their assessment that in this instance to wording in POFA is not relevant.

POPLA will refer to POFA to establish if the operator has transferred liability of the PCN when the driver has not been identified. The assessor did consider POFA and confirmed that operator had met the requirements of POFA in transferring liability of the chare to you as the registered keeper and that we will not apply POFA in regard to stopping in a no stopping area.

Essentially, the driver is required to comply with the terms and conditions displayed on the signage and, by stopping in a no stopping area, breached the terms and conditions

I have reviewed the assessor’s decision and I am satisfied that the outcome reached is correct and that no procedural error has occurred. As POPLA is a one-stage process, there is no opportunity for you to appeal the decision.

As our involvement in your appeal has now concluded you may wish to pursue matters further. For independent legal advice, please contact Citizens Advice at: www.citizensadvice.org.uk or call 0345 404 05 06 (English) or 0345 404 0505 (Welsh).

In closing, I am sorry that your experience of using our service has not been positive. We have reached the end of our process and my response now concludes our complaints procedure. I trust you will appreciate that there will be no further review of your complaint and it will not be appropriate for us to respond to any further correspondence on this matter.

Yours sincerely

Paul Garrity

POPLA Complaints Team

#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#

 

KeithP

The assessor has confirmed in their assessment that in this instance to wording in POFA is not relevant.
POPLA will refer to POFA to establish if the operator has transferred liability of the PCN when the driver has not been identified. The assessor did consider POFA and confirmed that operator had met the requirements of POFA in transferring liability of the chare to you as the registered keeper and that we will not apply POFA in regard to stopping in a no stopping area.

What nonsense.

POPLA had no right to decide that they could use POFA to determine that the keeper was liable for anything that was not parking.

Mr Garrity has decided that the keeper is liable for whatever the driver did - even if it wasn't parking.

POPLA - Parking on Private Land Appeals - why are they even considering anything here when everyone agrees that no parking took place?

Castle

KeithP said:

The assessor has confirmed in their assessment that in this instance to wording in POFA is not relevant.
POPLA will refer to POFA to establish if the operator has transferred liability of the PCN when the driver has not been identified. The assessor did consider POFA and confirmed that operator had met the requirements of POFA in transferring liability of the chare to you as the registered keeper and that we will not apply POFA in regard to stopping in a no stopping area.

What nonsense.

POPLA had no right to decide that they could use POFA to determine that the keeper was liable for anything that was not parking.

Mr Garrity has decided that the keeper is liable for whatever the driver did - even if it wasn't parking.

Indeed to quote Mr Garrity:-(my bold)
"Further, the images taken of the vehicle at the time of the parking event show that the area has red cross hatching on the floor and NO STOPPING". 

If a "parking event" takes place then they must allow a grace period.

They are not impartial and they simply make up their own rules and interpretations, even if that means ignoring the law.