Smart parking/lease/company car

Le_Kirk

Allboxes wrote: »

UPDATE!!!

Hi do back again. After getting 3 cancelled. Another one has come through & has been rejected which is very bizarre on the basis thar 3 have been overturned for the same reason. POPLA code has been given & what makes it even funny is that Signage around the area has now been changed. Any advice to how to write a popla letter ?

NEWBIE sticky post #3 for POPLA appeal assistance.

Redx

SEE POST #3 OF THE newbies faq STICKY THREAD for POPLA assistance

that thread is your go to bible, you shouldnt need to ask

BEAR IN MIND THAT THEY CHURN THESE THINGS OUT AT A PHENOMENAL RATE , SO PAST ISSUES MEAN NOTHING , THEY SEE SOMETHING IN FRONT OF THEM , THEY DO IT, ITS ALL CHURNED OUT WITH NO THOUGHT PROCESS WHATSOEVER

Allboxes

Thank you will check it out

Fruitcake

Remember, you should be appealing as hirer/lessee.

You should also complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

Allboxes

UPDATE!!
So POPLA overturned the PCN Whoop!! Whoop!! This is what I sent 

"Dear POPLA Adjudicator,

Vehicle Registration – XXXXXXX

PCN TCXXXXXXX

Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) was issued by SMART PARKING Ltd to (“Hvf LTD C-O Lex Autolease”) as a Notice to Hirer. I confirm that the Notice should have been passed to the Driver for the purpose of the corresponding definition under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”) and write to formally appeal POPLA  (XXXXXXXXXX) on the grounds of Misleading Signage and scam of accepting fault of misleading signage.

After receiving 7 PCN’s from SMART PARKING due to misleading signage information, 3  PCN have been cancelled by SMART PARKING, whilst 3 other PCN were paid by Lex Autolease without Driver made aware.  Please see below

Parking Charge Notice

25/10/2019 - xxxx ( PCN has been paid by Lex Autolease)

30/10/2019 - xxxx(PCN has been paid by Lex Autolease)

29/11/2019 - xxxx(PCN has been confirmed Paid as of 18/12/2019, However Appeal has been sent via online system)

2/12/2019 - xxxx - Cancelled

3/12/2019 - xxxx - Cancelled

6/12/2019 - xxxx- Cancelled

12/12/2019 – xxxxx

Noted that within the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 2012 it discusses the clarity that needs to be provided to make a motorist/driver aware of the parking charge. Specifically, it requires that the driver is given 'adequate notice' of the charge. POFA 2012 defines 'adequate notice' as follows:

''(3) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) 'adequate notice' means notice given by: (a) the display of one or more notices in accordance with any applicable requirements prescribed in regulations under paragraph 12 for, or for purposes including, the purposes of sub-paragraph (2); or (b) where no such requirements apply, the display of one or more notices which: (i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and (ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park vehicles on the relevant land''.

Even in circumstances where POFA 2012 does not apply, I believe this to be a reasonable standard to use when making my own assessment, as complainant, of the signage in place at the location. Having considered the signage in place at this particular site against the requirements of Section 18 of the BPA Code of Practice and POFA 2012, I am of the view that the signage at the site - given the minuscule font size of the sum, which is illegible in most photographs and does not appear at all at the entrance - is NOT sufficient to bring the parking charge (i.e. the sum itself) to the attention of the motorist.

The signage in Grays Shopping Centre is MISLEADING – The signage claims the following below and image shown below

FIRST 3 hours      Free

3-5 Hours            £3

5-12 Hours          6 

A large part of the shopping centre advertises Free parking for 3 hours and the instructions does not include a clear explanation stating if you stay longer than 3 hours, you will not be eligible for the ‘Free 3 hour parking’-

 Driver’s clear understanding is that if Drivers should stay for a total of 8 hours, The first 3 hours are FREE- 5 hours remaining = PAY for the 5 Hours.

 As these PCNs only came to light as of the xxxx, a complaint was made to the Land Owners and the Local MP and since the New Year (2020), SMART PARKING SIGNAGE has now been amended which proves that the SIGNAGE during these PCN Charges were CLEARLY misleading. Evidence can be seen below.

Even after proving that the initial signage was misleading during these PCNs and having 3 out of the 7 overturned, although the paid PCNs cannot be refunded as they were paid without driver being informed within the correct timescale (According to the Memorandum of Understanding between the BPA and a member of BVRLA – details of the driver should have been passed on). SMART PARKING has changed the signs but has decided to reject the appeal which now makes the matter an unregulated scam. This matter will now be taken to further to the local MP.

Under Lord Denning’s Red Hand Rule, the parking terms should be SIMPLE, CLEAR and CONCISE  as was found to be the case in the car park in ‘Beavis’

Initial appeal was made to SMART PARKING on xxxxx and rejection on the xxx.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response.

Yours faithfully,"

nosferatu1001

What did POPLA decide on?