Parking after midnight

Redx

As above , poor and non illuminated signage , in the dark , cannot firm a contract , Lord Dennings red hand rule was not met

Palec

Thank you, looked into Lord Dennings red hand rule, so it is applicable, will use it, also CM comment, yes their pictures are in daylight, but mine are, too ( did not think to do it in dark), but mention it anyway. They claim it is luminated, but font is much smaller, which says to read T&C's inside car park where it is already in red no parking after midnight till 5am but nothing bringing it to driver's attention on entry.
I will do this today evenso their reply was 28.6.
As a matter of interest if their contract does not have expiry date and is done with agent only as for signature, not landowners, does it change much in my favor?Thank you for your help....

Fruitcake

The contract must be with or flowing from the landowner. If it is with an agent, then there must be a contract between the landowner and agent authorising the agent to form contracts with a third party.

You can mention the following if you wish, but don't expect a PoPLA assessor to understand the law. Last year there were problems with several being incapable of counting up to 14.

Section 43 of the Companies Act 2006 requires someone with express or implied authority from both parties to sign a Simple Contract.
Express authority would be a company owner, or officer such as a director or company secretary.
Implied authority would be a position within the company (job description) specifically authorised by someone with express authority, or stated in company documents such as its articles of association.

For a document to be validly executed, it must be signed by two officers of a company, in accordance with Section 44 of the Companies Act 2006.

If the contract in your case is with an agent, then you aver that there is no contract between the landowner and agent giving them the authority to form a contract with an unregulated third party.

If the names or signatures and/or position within the two parties on the contract have been redacted, then you should aver that they do not have express or implied authority to form a contract in accordance with the strict requirements of Section 43 of the Companies Act 2006, and not validly executed in accordance with the strict requirements of Section 44 of the Companies Act 2006.

Likewise, if the names of the signatories are legible/unredacted, check them against Companies House records under "People" to see if they were officers of the companies at the time the alleged contract was signed. If they were not, then you should aver that they did not have express or implied authority to form a contract in accordance with the strict requirement of Sections 43 and 44 of the Companies Act 2006.

Palec

Thank you.
Am re-reading their statement and this sentence is interesting:
'' It is settled law that a driver is deemed to have accepted the terms and conditions of parking by the act of parking and leaving a vehicle''.So once somebody would do emergency stop feeling unwell and not leave vehicle, does it help that driver only stops because of unable to drive and does not leave vehicle? Pictures from their cameras do show only times and reg.details of vehicle...
Thank you for clarification...

Palec

There are sufficient signs advising drivers there is no parking between the hours of 12:00am and 05:00, and that failure to do so may result in a parking charge being issued. Mr ...'s vehicle entered the car park between these times; consequently, the parking charge was issued correctly. 

So all clear as for signage the last think I am considering to include is those mitigating factors, which I mentioned anyway, but POPLA does not take into consideration just court I suppose ( as for driving feeling ill ).

Redx

Popla never consider mitigation , not in their remit

Concentrate on signage , Poor illumination , no landowner authority , red hand rule , etc

Umkomaas

Was signage ever included in the original appeal to POPLA - I don't think we've seen the appeal?

Redx

Umkomaas said:

Was signage ever included in the original appeal to POPLA - I don't think we've seen the appeal?

I am assuming that even if it isn't , their evidence pack will enable a popla comment reply due to mentioning it

Palec

ok Thank you.
Popla comments Final draft:

I don't agree with parking operator's claiming signage is adequate, because on entry it says 3 HOURS MAXIMUM STAY ONLY in large letters, then in smaller font ''see notices in car park for terms and conditions and data use.  I provided pictures in my Popla appeal.

Operator's evidence pictures are done during day light and after Midnight the only fairly visible part is that in 3 hours maximum stay.

Lord Dennings red hand rule was not met as it is obvious from my entrance picture.

Parking operator named wrong person in the text provided, which seems to be pre-populated not taking into consideration individual circumstances.''Mr Hawthorn failed to identify the driver, and he is therefore liable to pay this charge as the registered keeper of the vehicle''.

In their evidence they provided signed agent acting on behalf of owners not actual owners signature dated 03/2020 with no expiry date, which I believe does not correlate with appropriate legislation.

 The contract must be with or flowing from the landowner. If it is with an agent, then there must be a contract between the landowner and agent authorising the agent to form contracts with a third party. Section 43 of the Companies Act 2006 requires someone with express or implied authority from both parties to sign a Simple Contract.

Express authority would be a company owner, or officer such as a director or company secretary.

For a document to be validly executed, it must be signed by two officers of a company, in accordance with Section 44 of the Companies Act 2006.

If the contract is with an agent, then there is no contract between the landowner and agent giving them the authority to form a contract with an unregulated third party.

On balance no valid contract is in place between operator and driver and I as registered keeper of the vehicle would point out  that  Lord Dennings red hand rule was not met on purpose just to get money from innocent drivers and in this case driver being ill, which is also unethical.
( it contains 1998 characters) 

Palec

Btw I mentioned signage in my appeal to POPLA