Big thanks to the Forum-won at POPLA against care parking

ALIBOBSY · 21 September 2021 at 9:36AM

As in the title want to give a big thanks to ev1 on the forum, the sticky at the top is great.

The registered keeper had a notice alleging "patron abuse" on a local car park.

Used the basic appeal on here which was rejected to get my POPLA code.

Then used the resources on here to throw a massive appeal document covering everything I could think of.

The Parking company threw back a huge document most of which was rubbish and even contradicted themselves. As advised on here I picked out a few items to comment on and I awaited my result.

Decision

Successful

Assessor Name

Natalie Matthews

Assessor summary of operator case

The operator’s case in the Parking Charge notice (PCN) was issued on the grounds of “Abused Patron Parking” The operator states that the signage clearly states “Customer only car park. You must remain on site at all times your vehicle remains in this car park”

Assessor summary of your case

The appellant states that the driver has not been identified and has not met the conditions of Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA). The appellant also states that the driver did not leave the site. They have also raised a number reasons that the British Parking Association (BPA) code has not been met including lack of signage and that the operator does not have the authority to issue charges on this land. The appellant also mentions that the planning permission on the site was based entirely on the site not being used as a car park. The driver provided a receipt from Aldi, as proof of purchase on the date in question.

Assessor supporting rational for decision

It is the responsibility of the operator to provide POPLA with sufficient and clear evidence to demonstrate that it issued the PCN correctly. However, in this case whilst I acknowledge the reason why the PCN was issued, I am not satisfied that the operator has adequately rebutted the appellant’s grounds. I am not satisfied that the warden has clearly identified the driver exiting the car park. They have not attached photographic evidence of the driver exiting the vehicle or exiting the car park. I acknowledge the warden’s account in the form of a notation, but that is not sufficient evidence to prove that driver left the site. I am therefore not satisfied that the PCN was issued correctly without the above-mentioned evidence and cannot conclude that the driver breached the terms and conditions of the car park. The appellant has referenced several other points within their appeal to POPLA, but I do not feel that these need to be reviewed individually based on the outcome reached. I am not satisfied that the PCN has been issued correctly, therefore I must allow this appeal.

Thanks ev1