Popla Draft Vs Private Parking Solutions

Coupon-mad

SimpsonSimonSon said:

Coupon-mad said:

You guess it was for not displaying a permit even thought the PCN tells you that's not what it was for?

Where is their evidence that this was 'parking in a no parking area'?  That should be the thrust of the first point in your POPLA appeal.

Ah yes, I thought that the permit was referring to some sort of exemption for the no parking zone. Wouldn't the operators evidence be the signs on the wall.

Yes of course they'll try that, but: 

Are those lit and are they next to that bay? How can it be no parking if it's a bay?  You need to think a bit deeper about this scam and your POPLA appeal first point must deal with the allegation on the PCN, and it is NOT about any permit.

SimpsonSimonSon

nosferatu1001 said:

And the map in their contract defining where "no parking zones" are, and how they have offered a contract to park whereas in stead they have NOT offered anything at all. They've forbidden this

Right so I am beginning to understand how I should formulate my first point. It should be about the operators lack of evidence that I was parking in a no parking area. That Private Parking Solutions ltd. failed to provide the driver of the vehicle with a contractual agreement that they could enter. Based on a lack of information provided regarding where parking zones are (a map on the sign).

SimpsonSimonSon

nosferatu1001 said:

And the map in their contract defining where "no parking zones" are, and how they have offered a contract to park whereas in stead they have NOT offered anything at all. They've forbidden this

Would I be right in understanding that the operators "contract" is their sign? Your point being that as their sign did not contain a map and didn't clearly delineate the private parking "zone" then the contract in question was insufficient to be binding upon the driver. At the site some bays were marked as private, I have attached a google maps image, wouldn't this invalidate any protestation of ignorance regarding the status of the bay? Even if the driver didn't see the markings.

Coupon-mad

The very fact that the car was in a PARKING bay means that this can't have been a NO PARKING area.  It's that simple (and POPLA are a bit simple...).

SimpsonSimonSon

Excellent, I'll get typing.

nosferatu1001

Its more than that as well
1) It is a PARKING bay. That it says private on the road means nothing - unless it is made SO ABUNDANTLY CLEAR it is still a bay that people can park in! So their allgeaiton is, on the face of it, wrong. 
2) Further, if they state it is NO PARKING, then they havent offered a contract. THey have forbidden it. You know that a contract requires an Offer, Acceptance and COnsideration. They didnt make an offer, by definition
3) Further, you allege they have no contract to offer parking in the NO PARKING bays - to really hammer home how stupid this is - and thats the contract I was actually referring to.

SimpsonSimonSon

Point One Insufficient Operator Evidence

Private Parking Solutions (london) ltd. failed to provide the driver of the vehicle with a contractual agreement that they could enter. Without a map showing where zone a and b actually are the driver cannot make an informed decision where to park. The parking bays are not clearly part of any managed car park or parking site.

The operator has claimed that the vehicle was parked in an enforcement zone in a no parking at anytime area but has failed to provide any evidence to back up this claim. Allegedly the bay in which the vehicle was parked was in an “enforcement zone” where there is “no parking at any time”. I contend that the operator has failed to make it abundently clear that this bay on the side of the road was a no parking area. How can a parking bay be designated as a no parking area. 

Evidence one cars parked in the alleged no parking area
 

Note that the markings have rubbed off the writing in the middle bay.

Clearly we can see that there are cars parked in what the operator claims is a no parking at any time area. More bizzarely the operator claims that the driver has breached the terms and conditions of the parking area. How is this possible if the operator hasn’t shown where the actual parking area is. On the operators signs there are no maps showing where these areas of strictly no parking actually are.

Evidence two lack of maps on the signs

From what is apparent the operator hasn’t offered any form of contract that can be entered into, rather the operator has forbidden parking in an undefined area.These signs were unlit high on a wall, could not be read from the vehicle. The markings on the road are hard to see in the dark especially on dark rainy nights. To add insult to injury the operator alleges that by pulling into these parking bays one immediately becomes liable to pay a large fine but without the person parking having the time to read the sign. 

Evidence Three the operators claim of ‘immediately entering a contract’. This can be found in paragraph three, sentence three under the bold writing in the middle of the page.

It is illegal to be forced into a contract aginst ones consent, stating that one is immdiately liable removes the right of one party to refuse any contract being made. 

Private Parking Solutions (london) ltd. failed to provide the driver of the vehicle with a contractual agreement that they could enter. Without a map showing where zone a and b actually are the driver cannot make an informed decision where to park. The parking bays are not clearly part of any managed car park or parking site. 

In conclusion and to summerise: It is a parking bay, so unless it is made so abundantly clear otherwise, it is still a bay that people can park in! Meaning the operators allegation that it is forbidden to park, is on the face of it, wrong. In addition, if the operator states it is a no parking area, then there is no contract offered. The operator by making parking forbidden have nullified the pre-requisites needed for a contract, namely: an offer, consideration and acceptance of said offer. Without an offer to park no contract can be made, therefore the driver cannot be held liable to breaking the terms of a contract. 

Evidence two

SimpsonSimonSon

Rewritten point one. The first evidence is the google maps image showing the parking bays. The second is the sign. The third is the second letter the operator sent. 

I would like to send this off tomorrow, I really appreciate all the help you guys have offered. Please let me know if you think I need to change anything. The rest of the letter is the same as before except for the changes you already suggested. 

Thank you

Umkomaas

I would like to send this off tomorrow

When is your actual POPLA deadline?

SimpsonSimonSon

28 days after the second letter. That was sent of the 11th of January, so on the 8th of February.