Help with POPLA appeal

Sequester

Coupon-mad said:

Is it worth including grace period into the POPLA appeal? Given that it's been reduced.

Yes and I posted an example of what I put in such a case I submitted for someone this week - it's in the POPLA Update thread by @BrownTrout

Many thanks. I've added this to the draft.

Do you think inefficient signage has any grounds for this appeal given the driver purchased a ticket?

D_P_Dance

Do you think inefficient signage has any grounds for this appeal given the driver purchased a ticket?

Most certainly.  Ir this is a shopping centre your need to shop must surely exceed you need to comply with a scammer's overbearing T&Cs   How many people would take the 5-10 minutes it requires to read that sign.  IMO the whole  thing amounts to an unfair  contract under the Consumer Rights Act. 

Have you complained to your MP?

MistyZ

Sequester said:

Do you think inefficient signage has any grounds for this appeal given the driver purchased a ticket?

Yes, inadequate signage is still very relevant.  It is not excused on the grounds that the motorist decided to park - signage should inform motorists quickly, clearly and simply about the parking T&Cs.    

Sequester

D_P_Dance said:

Do you think inefficient signage has any grounds for this appeal given the driver purchased a ticket?

Most certainly.  Ir this is a shopping centre your need to shop must surely exceed you need to comply with a scammer's overbearing T&Cs   How many people would take the 5-10 minutes it requires to read that sign.  IMO the whole  thing amounts to an unfair  contract under the Consumer Rights Act. 

Thanks.

D_P_Dance said:

Have you complained to your MP?

No not yet. Not really sure on the wording. I will do though.

MistyZ said:

Sequester said:

Do you think inefficient signage has any grounds for this appeal given the driver purchased a ticket?

Yes, inadequate signage is still very relevant.  It is not excused on the grounds that the motorist decided to park - signage should inform motorists quickly, clearly and simply about the parking T&Cs.    

Thanks. Took some more photographs of the signs today.

Coupon-mad

Good, pics of unclear signs embedded into your POPLA appeal by way of illustration, makes for a better case.

Sequester

Draft appeal attached. If anyone can have a look over it and give me some feedback it would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

Umkomaas

As the NtK you posted previously is PoFA compliant, the following part of your appeal is moot. 

2.  The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge

They have no need to show who the driver was as they are able hold the keeper liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4). 

Coupon-mad

Remove the horrendous intro with split infinitives, before we self-combust with horror at seeing that yet again.

Remove #2 because PP comply with the POFA, as already said.

Two typos here in the final point:

and the shere number of terms and small print on the entrance sign. Also the fact that there is seperate pay machines for both cash and card and that they don’t always work on the first attempt. 

Make it clear that they DIDN'T work at the first attempt that day, and how long it took to actually pay, due to this.  Say whether the driver had to download an app and how long that took, or did they pay in coins and was there a queue a the machine to pay incase (course there was...remember...describe it!) and embed a copy of the PDT Machine slip if you have it.  Really go to town describing why it took x minutes to pay, and xx minutes to leave (ten?).

Change this bit as there is no gap between the main tariff sign and the machines!

Are drivers meant to read those terms then sprint along, dodging past other visitors to get to the machine, 

Sequester

Umkomaas said:

As the NtK you posted previously is PoFA compliant, the following part of your appeal is moot. 

2.  The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge

They have no need to show who the driver was as they are able hold the keeper liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4). 

So best to remove that whole section?

KeithP

Sequester said:

Umkomaas said:

As the NtK you posted previously is PoFA compliant, the following part of your appeal is moot. 

2.  The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge

They have no need to show who the driver was as they are able hold the keeper liable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (Schedule 4). 

So best to remove that whole section?

Well, yes.

What's the point of stating that they haven't identified the driver if they have used POFA to transfer the driver's liability to the keeper?