POPLA refused grace periods, what should I do now?

lworbey

Brief history, I received a PCN from Euro Car Parks for parking more than the allowed 3 hours except the car wasn't parked for more than 3 hours. The PCN was automated camera of entering and leaving the car park which was not the time the car was parked for. It recorded the car as being there for 3 hours and 12 minutes.

I appealed using the ECP process (as registered keeper only) which they rejected and I then appealed using a POPLA based on 2 grace periods of 10 minutes, one before and one after.

POPLA response was that the grace periods were duplicates and effectively it should only be a single 10 minutes meaning my 12 minutes was over. This is obviously wrong based on BPA guidlines so what should I do now?

POPLA text below for reference:

Decision: Unsuccessful
Assessor Name: XXXXXXXX
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to the motorist due to parking for longer than the maximum period allowed.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant says they were an occupant in the car on the day, as well as the keeper. The appellant states the vehicle was not parked for longer than the maximum time. The appellant states the operator has not allowed a grace period. The appellant says there are two grace periods at the site, one at the start of parking and one at the end. The appellant has provided evidence in support of their appeal.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The signage at the site states: “…MAXIMUM STAY 3 HOURS…FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING WILL RESULT IN THE ISSUE OF A £90 PARKING CHARGE NOTICE…MAXIMUM STAY 3 HOURS…”. The operator uses cameras to capture the registration number of cars entering and exiting the car park. I have checked the photographs, and I can see from the timestamp the motorist was at the car park for three hours 12 minutes. Having reviewed the photographic evidence provided by the operator, I am satisfied there are sufficient signs placed at the entrance and throughout the site displaying the terms and conditions offered with a helpline number to use if a motorist needs assistance. The operator issued a PCN to the motorist due to parking for longer than the maximum period allowed. The appellant says they were an occupant in the car on the day, as well as the keeper. The operator has provided a copy of the notice to keeper sent to the appellant. I have reviewed the notice to keeper against the relevant sections of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and I am satisfied that it is compliant, and that the operator has successfully transferred liability to the keeper of the vehicle. Therefore, it is the keeper’s liability for the PCN I will be considering. The appellant states the vehicle was not parked for longer than the maximum time. The appellant states the operator has not allowed a grace period. The appellant says there are two grace periods at the site, one at the start of parking and one at the end. Section 13.2 of the British Parking Association (BPA), Code of Practice states, “If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a minimum of 10 minutes”. Section 13.4 of the BPA Code of Practice states, “You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes”. Section 13.2 is a duplicate of section 13.4, a motorist does not get a 20-minute grace period. As the site has a maximum parking time, the time starts from when the vehicle enters the site, the operator has provided photographic evidence of the vehicle remaining on site in excess of the maximum time by 12 minutes, It is apparent a grace period has been allowed. As the site has a maximum time, it is the responsibility of the motorist to make adjustments and leave the site before they exceed the time allowed. It is the duty of the motorist to ensure that when they have entered a car park that they have understood the terms and conditions before deciding to park. On this occasion by remaining parked at the site the appellant accepted the terms and conditions. As they exceeded the maximum time allowed, they did not adhere to the terms and conditions. As such, I conclude that the operator issued the PCN correctly.

---

This has really angered me as they clearly haven't understood the code of practice wording. They claim that by entering the car park and parking that I have agreed to the terms but until you park you cannot read the sign, especially while driving. They claim the 2 grace periods are the same even though they aren't, its pretty obvious based on the wording but I feel they haven't read it properly.

What should I do now, what do ECP usually do if I refuse to pay, should I expect to get court summons? If so what are my chances at winning?

Thanks for any advice! :money:

waamo

In a civil case there is no "summons", not that you get a summons these days anyway.

Euro are a rare beast that they don't readily rush to court. They currently stick to the scary letters and no more routine. This may change in the future there again it may not.

If this were me I would prepare for a court claim but not stress about it. One may never come but a bit of preparation won't hurt.

Redx

I would complain to the lead adjudicator at popla , John Gallagher , by email , complaining about the error above and how they have looked at both grace periods in detail , correctly , and then incorrectly dismissed one as being a duplicate of the other

It may not change the decision , but it would help in the future if they issued an apology over this error

They recently got it wrong over POFA timescales , until a sector expert put them right and explained the wording as if to a 2 year old , clearly the same applies here

But the underlying issue is that the BPA does not make it crystal clear , to avoid such an issue as this , hopefully the new government CoP will be clear on grace periods to avoid such errors

Fruitcake

Yet another assessor that doesn't understand the appeal process.

Saying one grace period is a repeat of the other is utter cobblers. If the CoP says there are two, then there are two. A complaint to PoPLA and the BPA should be made that the assessor has made a procedural error meaning the appellant has not received a fair appeal.

The_Deep

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]IMO, if they took this to court they would be likely to struggle. Judges tend to pay heed to codes of practice.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][/FONT] [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, 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]

beamerguy

Agreed to everything said above ..... COMPLAIN.

The current POPLA is due to be replaced by a professional body

This is the problem of the BPA who screwed up with first so called POPLA because they owed them money .... then the BPA took on a shamed legal called Wright Hassall who tried to scam the motorist, then onwards to the current (so called) POPLA who have proved themselves to be out of work teaboys

In others words, POPLA, just like the BPA are the biggest dinosaurs in the modern world. The BPA are in denial that they are a complete failure

Just wait now for the PPC, they waste their time instructing idiot debt collectors who you ignore
Do let us know what happens next

lworbey

I have emailed info@popla and complaints@popla with an FAO for John Gallagher pointing out the error so we'll see what response I get.

I will also be emailing the local MP although I'm a little unsure about the wording for this, any tips?

KeithP

Here's an example written by another poster earlier this evening...

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=76799895#post76799895

Adjust it to suit your situation.

Do not just stick on your own thread. Look around and see what's going on.

Coupon-mad

What should I do now, what do ECP usually do if I refuse to pay, should I expect to get court summons? If so what are my chances at winning?

99% win rate on this forum. Doubt ECP will try.

The POPLA complaint is pointless but try anyway.

What happened when you simply complained to the Retail Park?

The_Deep

This is quite old but it may help you,


https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html