Popla defence against MET parking

Lucky_Lee

Hello,

I am new to this I apologise in advance.... please I need help urgently help and advice - Popla is asking me to put in defence reply within 5 days from today. Popla sent me an email to respond to MET response. 

Long story short:

My Husband &  I parked in M&S / BP petrol station, We’ve filled our car with some petrol then parked to make small shopping inside the M&S food store. After come back we realised one of tyre was flat. We contacted RAC Breakdown who told us there is a 6 hour wait time because of the pandemic they were shorts staffed. So we decided not to wait that long because  we had children in the car two of whom with a disability, We have displayed disabled badge on the windscreen. My husband then tried to change the tyre himself. Parking is allowed for 30 minutes but over stayed under mitigation circumstances for 71 minutes.

I have appeal to Met parking and Of course they rejected his appeal and sent a POPLA code I have appeal to POPLA. But now dithery want me to put in a defence respond within five days.

Any advice on how to proceed given that I spoke in first person in his appeal letter.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you 


This is what 2000 wording defence is saying ......

MET Parking Services - EW

Operator Case Summary

In her appeal to POPLA Mrs XXXXX XXXXXX raises the following grounds of appeal: • No genuine pre-estimate of loss We refer you to the Supreme Court ruling in ParkingEye v Beavis which may be found at https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-judgment.pdf. This ruling revolved around a charge of similar size and nature and the judges ruled that the charge need not represent the loss suffered, was not excessive or unconscionable, did not breach the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations and was enforceable. • MET Parking have failed to provide clarification of the basis of the charge or a VAT invoice We have included a copy of our contract with the landowner in Section E of our evidence pack. We have redacted commercially sensitive details and highlighted relevant clauses for ease of reading. Our contract with the landowner grants us authority to form contracts with motorists and issue parking charge notices for contractual breach. • Signage fails to provide information regarding the contractually agreed sum We are confident that there are sufficient signs in place in this car park and that the signs are prominently displayed and clearly state the terms and conditions. In Section E of our evidence pack we have included images of the signs in place and a site plan of the location. It remains the driver’s responsibility to check the signs where they park and comply with the stated terms and conditions. We are confident that our signage complies with all relevant legislation and regulations. • The vehicle had broken down We did request evidence of the vehicle difficulties Mrs XXXX XXXXX mentioned in the initial appeal, however the requested evidence was not supplied. We note that the motorist has also not provided any supporting evidence to POPLA. As no supporting information was provided to demonstrate that the vehicle had broken down and as no request was made to the site to extend her stay we had to reach a decision based on the information available. As the vehicle exceeded the maximum permitted stay, we believe the charge notice was issued correctly and the appeal should be refused. The terms and conditions of parking are clearly stated on the signs prominently displayed at the entrance to and around this service station. These include parking is permitted for BP customers whilst on the premises only and there is a maximum permitted stay of 30 minutes. The photographic evidence in Section E demonstrates and the driver acknowledges the vehicle remained in the car park for longer than the maximum stay. It remains the driver’s responsibility to check the signs where they park and comply with the stated terms and conditions. Therefore, we believe the charge notice was issued correctly and the appeal should be refused.  

Plus there’s an attachment with this defence but don’t know how to edit my details and repost here!

Le_Kirk

You are required to answer the points raised by the parking company - MET.  You have 2000 characters not 2000 words, so keep it short, bullet points without the bullets, just like text speak.  If you raised a point in the original appeal and MET have not countered it, you win that point.  Your main point is that you were suffering from a vicissitude, i.e. broken down and have a receipt from RAC to prove it.  Being broken down is not parking.

 The vehicle had broken down We did request evidence of the vehicle difficulties Mrs XXXX XXXXX mentioned in the initial appeal, however the requested evidence was not supplied. We note that the motorist has also not provided any supporting evidence to POPLA. As no supporting information was provided to demonstrate that the vehicle had broken down and as no request was made to the site to extend her stay we had to reach a decision based on the information available. 

This is from the MET statement, you need to counter that by saying you did supply proof (if it is true) OR you supply it NOW, with your comments.

D_P_Dance

Have you complained to your MP?

Coupon-mad

You can't add evidence at comments stage. 

I would simply reply and say that, as the tyre was changed by the appellant themselves, what evidence so MET expect to have been produced.  The appellant's account is the only evidence and he is the only witness.  MET have no witness account but should have considered the mitigation properly, and you ask that POPLA refer that back to MET to reconsider a disabled person changing a tyre as being a perfectly valid mitigating circumstance to cancel a PCN, as it will be when the new statutory framework comes in (this will never get past a proper ADR single appeals service and the PCN would be cancelled this time next year when mitigation will hopefully be properly considered). 

  And point out any issued with their evidence but you will probably lose this POPLA appeal.  Never mind, no-one pays MET and POPLA loss means nowt.

You need to URGENTLY complain to the retail park/M&S and tell them what happened.  Should have done that before or instead of POPLA. 

DO IT NOW.  M&S or the retail park management can cancel this in a heartbeat if you complain loudly enough and mention that this was a huge struggle for a disabled person, and that you all feel utterly dejected and bullied and are frankly horrified that consumers can be subjected to extortionate demands like this, and you will never return, etc.  Show proof of being a customer and the retail park or M&S Manager will cancel it.

Lucky_Lee

Coupon-mad said:

You can't add evidence at comments stage. 

I would simply reply and say that, as the tyre was changed by the appellant themselves, what evidence so MET expect to have been produced.  The appellant's account is the only evidence and he is the only witness.  MET have no witness account but should have considered the mitigation properly, and you ask that POPLA refer that back to MET to reconsider a disabled person changing a tyre as being a perfectly valid mitigating circumstance to cancel a PCN, as it will be when the new statutory framework comes in (this will never get past a proper ADR single appeals service and the PCN would be cancelled this time next year when mitigation will hopefully be properly considered). 

  And point out any issued with their evidence but you will probably lose this POPLA appeal.  Never mind, no-one pays MET and POPLA loss means nowt.

You need to URGENTLY complain to the retail park/M&S and tell them what happened.  Should have done that before or instead of POPLA. 

DO IT NOW.  M&S or the retail park management can cancel this in a heartbeat if you complain loudly enough and mention that this was a huge struggle for a disabled person, and that you all feel utterly dejected and bullied and are frankly horrified that consumers can be subjected to extortionate demands like this, and you will never return, etc.  Show proof of being a customer and the retail park or M&S Manager will cancel it.

Thank you, I will use your feedback and I will contact M&S management right away, I didn’t realise they can get involved with this issue.

Lucky_Lee

D_P_Dance said:

Have you complained to your MP?

No. Is it too late? Also it happened in a In a different borough

Umkomaas

Lucky_Lee said:

D_P_Dance said:

Have you complained to your MP?

No. Is it too late? Also it happened in a In a different borough

You can only complain to your own constituency MP, but you can ask them to copy in their counterpart representing the area in which the parking incident took place so they are aware of what's going on in their manor. 

KeithP

But don't let this 'MP distraction' divert you from sending off your PoPLA comments in time.
PoPLA must be your first priority at this point in time.

Lucky_Lee

Thanks everyone, I will keep you up date on the outcome 

KeithP

But @Lucky_lee you said...

Lucky_Lee said:

...I will keep you up date on the outcome 

Lucky_Lee

KeithP said:

But @Lucky_lee you said...

Lucky_Lee said:

...I will keep you up date on the outcome 

Hi, Thanks for remaining me about this update. I have lost the POPLA appeal so, the family memeber that was driving the car on that day decied to pay the charge.

But today's post is totally different matter to this.