Private Parking Ticket POPLA Appeal

KeithP

Rock_Hbk said:

Please if you can share a link for newbies forum sticky thread...

The NEWBIES thread is one of the first four threads on the page where you found the New Thread button yesterday.

Apart from that, Ralph has already supplied you with a link to the NEWBIES thread at 11:13 this morning.

Rock_Hbk

Coupon-mad said:

That's the terrible appeal that the MSE article gives people and frankly, it's utter rubbish.

Good thing is i had followed the procedure of appealing on 25 or 26 the day after receiving a windscreen PCN and i still haven't received NTK from them and its been over 56 days since PCN was issued .Now i am planning to appeal to POPLA but need more help in making my case strong 

You read the NEWBIES thread but didn't use the newbies appeal protecting you as keeper?

Did you choose driver or keeper in ECP's dropdown menu?

HI ,
i have found the following Template which you have posted and everyone is referring to .
TEMPLATE ''ONE SIZE FITS ALL'' FIRST APPEAL THAT DOESN'T SAY WHO WAS DRIVING:

Re PCN number:

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner.

 Answer to you Question on Did i choose driver or keeper on drop down menu ?  which i am not too sure but i thing i did selected  KEEPER ..
And if i am not wrong the template  says to use this at FIRST APPEAL stage  can i still use a same TEMPLATE for  POPLA ???
In my situation on what grounds i should be appealing ?? 
As Half _way said POPLA doesn't accept mitigating circumstance not they will accept appeal on Unfair charges .
i have checked my PCN again it doesn't says anywhere about POFA  2012 and as mentioned in first post still haven't received NTK ...
Please guide me on this ..
Many Thanks 

KeithP

...can i still use a same TEMPLATE for  POPLA ???

No, definitely not.

If you are at the PoPLA stage you need to be reading the third post on the NEWBIES thread which offers guidance on how to create a winning PoPLA appeal.

Coupon-mad

No, it's not for POPLA. That's why there is an entire post about POPLA template wording (post #3).

Rock_Hbk

Hi Everyone ,
Thank you for guiding me  all the way up to here, i know  i wrote not only poorly worded but out of date ( format )appeal at first stage but now i have managed to put together an Appeal as attached below where i have used all those post available to use which i think are appropriate in my case  ..In my informal Appeal i did mention that i am a resident of those flat and provided them with the address of flat in this case can i use  permit cases appeal ??? 

This charge is incompatible with the rights under the lease - as decided by the Appeal case of 'JOPSON V HOME GUARD SERVICES' case number: B9GF0A9E on 29th June 2016, which also held that the Beavis case does not apply to this sort of car park.

In Beavis it was held that the purpose of a parking charge must not be to penalise drivers. Justification must depend on some other 'legitimate interest in performance extending beyond the prospect of pecuniary compensation flowing directly from the breach in question'. The true test was held to be 'whether the impugned provision is a secondary obligation which imposes a detriment on the contract-breaker out of all proportion to any legitimate interest [...] in the enforcement of the primary obligation'.

There can be no legitimate interest in punishing authorised loading/unloading, under the excuse of a 'parking' scheme where ostensibly - and as far as the landowner is concerned - the parking firm is contracted for the benefit of the leaseholders/landholders/tenants. It is unconscionable, contrary to the requirement of good faith and 'out of all proportion to any legitimate interest' to issue a parking penalty for permitted unloading/loading by a driver who has legitimate business and rights to do so.

These rights supersede any signs, which are of no consequence except to deter rogue unwanted drivers from leaving their vehicles when they have no business on site. This is true of any residential or business car park where tenants/leaseholders (who may be individuals or businesses) enjoy legal 'rights of way' which extend to drivers permitted to load/unload. A third party cannot unilaterally alter the terms of a tenancy agreement or a lease, nor disregard easements and rights of way that prevail in such car parks (residential or industrial).

This question was tested recently in an Appeal case in June 2016 (transcript attached as evidence for POPLA*). Please note this is an Appeal case, decided by a Senior Circuit Judge and as such, its findings on the definition of 'parking as opposed to loading' and the findings on leaseholder/permitted visitor/loading/delivering rights of way superseding parking signs, are persuasive on the lower courts.

Beavis did not deal with any of these matters - nor was it relevant to a 'permit' car park - but the following case and transcript I have provided, is relevant and the Judge even states that Beavis DOES NOT APPLY to this type of car park:

Appeal case at Oxford County Court, 'JOPSON V HOME GUARD SERVICES' case number: B9GF0A9E on 29th June 2016:

Sitting in Oxford County Court, Judge Charles Harris QC, found that Home Guard Services had acted unreasonably when issuing a penalty charge notice to Miss Jopson, a resident of a block of flats who parked in front of the communal entrance to unload furniture, rather than use her own parking space. After an initial appeal to the Independent Parking Committee was rejected, Home Guard Services sued Miss Jopson in the small claims court and won. Miss Jopson successfully appealed the case, her solicitors arguing that the charge was incompatible with the terms of the existing lease which also extended to certain rights for permitted visitors when loading/unloading. The Judge found that Laura Jopson and her fellow tenants (as well as people making deliveries or those dropping off children or disabled passengers) enjoy a right of way to the block’s entrance and that Home Guard Services’ regulations disregarded these rights. Home Guard Services were required to pay £2,000 towards the defendant's costs.

I also rely upon the Croydon Court decision in Pace Recovery and Storage v Mr N C6GF14F0 16/09/2016 (transcript attached as evidence for POPLA**).

District Judge Coonan dismissed the claim and refused leave to appeal, stating: ''I have to deal with this on the evidence that is before me now. I have before me a tenancy agreement which gives Mr [N. redacted] the right to park on the estate and it does not say “on condition that you display a permit”. It does not say that, so he has that right. What Pace Recovery is seeking to do is, unilaterally outside the contract, restrict that right to only when a permit is displayed. Pace Recovery cannot do that. It has got to be the other contracting party, Affinity Sutton, which amends the terms of the tenancy agreement to restrict the right to park on a place in circumstances in which a permit is displayed but that is not in this tenancy agreement and you as a third party cannot unilaterally alter the terms of the tenancy agreement.''

Can i add this in appeal ??
Please check this for me  give suggestions for any amendments needed.
Thank you all

Fruitcake

Make the lack of NTK point 1 as it should be your winning point. This only applies if you didn't reveal the driver's identity. If you did then that point is worthless.

If this was an own space case and there is nothing in the lease/AST about parking, permits, parking charges etcetera then of course you should include that in your appeal. You only need to win on one point, the scammers have to win on every point.

Don't put links in the appeal. Embed images at the relevant points so the assessor is forced to look at them.

D_P_Dance

If this is an own space have you read this?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2016/11/residential-parking.htmlantsot

Rock_Hbk

Hi everyone , 
My PCN has been cancelled as company issued me with parking ticket did not wanted to pursue it further .
Thank you everyone for your Help and support as without your help i wouldn't have known what to wright and on what basis .
Thanks a lot .

Le_Kirk

A good outcome.