UKPC - POPLA comments advice needed

digitfrly

Hi, I'm currently at the popla comments stage of the appeals process regarding a UKPC parking charging notice "staff member parked in no staff parking area" 

I've read through the NEWBIES thread re popla comments and think I have a few points to comment on but would appreciate some further advice if possible. 

I've attached the operators appeal pack as well as the initial appeal to popla (If there's a better way to do this just let me know)

Thank you in advance

Umkomaas

Why do you need two threads running for this?  Are you aware of the one case, one thread rule on the forum?  

digitfrly

Umkomaas said:

Why do you need two threads running for this?  Are you aware of the one case, one thread rule on the forum?  

Hi this is a different case - the previous POPLA appeal on the other thread was won.

Didn't want to add onto that one to avoid confusion. Apologies if this was the wrong thing to do. 

Umkomaas

Thanks for clearing that up. Same PPC, similar thread title, looked like one and the same.  A bit of background might help regulars to understand what has happened. I doubt many will work their way through 15 separate links to work out the story here. 

Coupon-mad

How can there be a 'no staff parking' areas, where is this and how do they know whether the person driving was indeed, staff?

digitfrly

Umkomaas said:

Thanks for clearing that up. Same PPC, similar thread title, looked like one and the same.  A bit of background might help regulars to understand what has happened. I doubt many will work their way through 15 separate links to work out the story here.

Totally understandable. 

Rough background is as follows:

1. UKPC issued a NTD at Intu Metrocentre stating a breach of terms "staff parked in no staff parking area"

2. Appealed as the keeper requesting evidence of a breach of terms, appeal eventually rejected and POPLA code received.

3. Appealed to POPLA as the keeper using the advice from the previous thread, top point: 

The operator (UKPC) has not shown that the parking terms and conditions have been breached

The operator has failed to provide any evidence that the driver of the vehicle on the date the parking charge was issued was a ‘staff member’. This vehicle is used by more than one family member, non of which work at or near the Metrocentre. The driver of the vehicle has never been identified and I am appealing solely as the registered keeper. The operator states that a breach of their terms and conditions has occurred but has not provided any evidence to substantiate this claim.

As I understand it, this carpark is free to customers, which the driver of the vehicle was. No evidence has been provided to suggest otherwise. With all those who have access to the vehicle living in such close proximity to the Metrocentre site (5 minutes away) this vehicle is frequently used to visit and park at the Metrocentre by various family members, to shop, dine, attend the cinema etc. This should not translate into an assumption from the operator that the vehicle is being used by a ‘staff member’. 





I have included on the following page all the pictures that the operator has provided as their evidence of a breach of terms, which merely show the vehicle parked in a free carpark. In addition, the operator has not shown the vehicle parked near or within a reasonable proximity of any signage.

Additional points included fillers from the NEWBIES thread plus photos. 

4. Operator uploaded their evidence pack including a vague, potentially fabricated warden witness statement, multiple plans of the site and signage proximity to where the vehicle was parked, multiple stock images of the signage and the operators outdated contract with the Metrocentre with no expiry (they've tried to justify this in their case summary). 

Have until Monday to upload comments to their evidence. Hope this helps.

Coupon-mad

Operator uploaded their evidence pack including a vague, potentially fabricated warden witness statement.

What exactly does that say and are there any photos to show where the 'driver' went or that they had a work lanyard on, or something?  Where on earth is their evidence.

Redx

that witness statement is pants, not even in proper english and could be anyone

UKPC do not use POFA based NTK,s so they fail on that alone in most cases

digitfrly

Coupon-mad said:

Operator uploaded their evidence pack including a vague, potentially fabricated warden witness statement.

What exactly does that say and are there any photos to show where the 'driver' went or that they had a work lanyard on, or something?  Where on earth is their evidence.

"women seen by warden went into abc yard then into back fire dore of ----- black court combat pants black bag white shoes" 

I'd like to be able to say the appalling English is because I've had a few gins!

No photos to show where the driver went or that the women they describe came from the vehicle the PCN was issued to. No photos of the fire door mentioned other than a birds eye view of the site with various areas circled and connected with lines. 

Coupon-mad

"women seen by warden went into abc yard then into back fire dore of ----- black court combat pants black bag white shoes" 

I'd like to be able to say the appalling English is because I've had a few gins!

LOL,  just write some short bullet points including that you don't recognise the description of these 'women' (plural) from the misspelt purported notes and that this hardly seems evidence of someone being a staff member, which is denied. No family members are staff here.  No photos to show where the driver went or that the women (plural) they describe came from the vehicle the PCN was issued to, and 'women' can't have been 'the driver' of a single car.  No photos of the fire door mentioned other than a birds eye view of the site with various areas circled and connected with lines.  Very garbled evidence - gobbledegook in fact, and you urge the Assessor to see it for what it is, and isn't!

MistyZ

digitfrly said:

"women seen by warden went into abc yard then into back fire dore of ----- black court combat pants black bag white shoes" 

This is just too good.  Black bag + white shoes?  Surely not!  UKPC have truly excelled themselves here.  

Go get 'em.