URGENT DEADLINE ONE PARKING SOLUTION APPEAL HELP NEEDED

Coupon-mad

I have no idea what the first long paragraph about the definition of 'person' is trying to say.  It's far too long and pointless IMHO.

Just use what I said and tell them you will report them to the BPA if they continue to refuse the appellant company a POPLA Code.

InaHaze

Fruitcake said:

Make sure you quote the correct and relevant parts of the Act and the Notes.

It's para 35 of the explanatory notes, not para 35 of the Act itself.

You also need to be careful where you say, I did not park as, because if you put your name to that response, then that reveals the driver's identity and blows an appeal from the company out of the water.

The appeal/response must either come from The Company or if from a named person it should be someone like the compony owner/director/secretary who was not driving.

Either way, the keeper/appellant should be using words like, The driver did not park, the driver did not breach parking terms and conditions.

Thank you fruitcake, all noted. 

InaHaze

Coupon-mad said:

I have no idea what the first long paragraph about the definition of 'person' is trying to say.  It's far too long and pointless IMHO.

Just use what I said and tell them you will report them to the BPA if they continue to refuse the appellant company a POPLA Code.

Thank you coupon mad, I will adjust.

InaHaze

Is this okay please?

Further to your email trying to circumvent the law by refusing to accept my appeal for a failure to provide a personal name and address, I would like to point out that an appeal from a company cannot be made conditional upon supplying the additional information you request. The company appealed in good time and if you refuse to supply a POPLA code I will report you to the BPA. Therefore, as the appeal was sent in within the appropriate timescale allocated, it is a valid appeal and I expect it to be treated as such.

I would like to clarify that the driver did not breach the terms and conditions of the alleged parking contract as no parking was carried out. For the avoidance of doubt as mentioned in xxxxx(I need to go back and find the case judgment) the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following definition of parking:  “To leave a vehicle in a carpark or other reserved space” and “To leave in a suitable place until required”. The concept of parking as opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it’ otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars. “

Even if the terms and conditions were found to be in breach, which they cannot be as no parking took place, you are obliged by the compulsory Code of Practice of your own Accredited Trade Association to apply a Grace Period, which would cover the time it took for the vehicle to be driven in and out.

Fruitcake

You should change "my appeal" (because it wasn't from an individual) to the company name.

You haven't mentioned the CRA at all now.

The CoP is not compulsory.

You haven't said who the complaint is from. (In my opinion it should be an officer of the company who was not driving). Better brains than mine might have a different suggestion.

The "case judgment" you refer to is the case of Laura Jopson vs Homeguard Services, an appeal court case that is persuasive on the lower courts. I think it's actually irrelevant because your complaint is that the appeal was rejected, not that the vehicle wasn't parked.

InaHaze

Thank you fruitcake, I have tweaked it, does this sound better?:

Further to your email trying to circumvent the law by refusing to accept an appeal for a failure to provide a personal name and address, I would like to point out that an appeal from a company cannot be made conditional upon supplying the additional information you request. The company appealed in good time and if you refuse to supply a POPLA code I will report you to the BPA. 

In paragraph 35 of the Consumer Rights Act explanatory notes it states that:  “A “person” is not just a natural person but can also include companies, charities and arms of government (and the reference to a “person” can also include more than one person). So where these types of body are acting for purposes relating to their trade, business, craft or profession, they are caught by the definition of trader.” Therefore, as the appeal was sent in within the appropriate timescale and in an appropriate manner, it is a valid appeal and I expect it to be treated as such.

I would like to clarify that the driver did not breach the terms and conditions of the alleged parking contract as no parking was carried out. For the avoidance of doubt as mentioned in  Laura Jopson vs Homeguard Services, “the Shorter Oxford Dictionary has the following definition of parking:  “To leave a vehicle in a carpark or other reserved space” and “To leave in a suitable place until required”. The concept of parking as opposed to stopping, is that of leaving a car for some duration of time beyond that needed for getting in or out of it, loading or unloading it, and perhaps coping with some vicissitude of short duration, such as changing a wheel in the event of a puncture. Merely to stop a vehicle cannot be to park it’ otherwise traffic jams would consist of lines of parked cars.“

Even if the terms and conditions were found to be in breach, which they cannot be as no parking took place, you are obliged by the Code of Practice of your own Accredited Trade Association to apply a Grace Period, which would cover the time it took for the vehicle to be driven in and out.

Was going just put The Company Name?

 

Fruitcake

It's better, but I still don't see the value of including anything in paragraph 3 after, “To leave in a suitable place until required”.
Without going back to the beginning of this thread I believe you said that the car drove through the monitored area and back, but didn't stop. Definitely mention that the car did not park and drove in and out, but I see no point in explaining the difference between stopping and parking if the vehicle didn't stop.
My apologies if that is not so, in which case you are right to include the judge's comments.

I'm no legal expert but I think signing off with just the company name is okay, or from an officer of the company provided it is stated that they were not driving.

Coupon-mad

Seconded. 

95Rollers

Fruitcake said:

I'm no legal expert but I think signing off with just the company name is okay, or from an officer of the company provided it is stated that they were not driving.

It's OK for the PPCs and Debt Chasers to sign off with a company name.  Or you could create a fictitious employee like DRP and other companies do!!!