Civil Enforcement EW - POPLA DECLINED- Court Claim Filed

massop

Hi guys,

I have been battling Civil enforcement on a parking charge, I have followed the normal guidelines to the letter and am now at the POPLA appeal stage.

without giving you the full wall of text I appealed based on the below points

As the registered keeper, I would like to appeal this notice on the following grounds:

1 The Charge not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
2. No standing to pursue charges in the courts nor to make contracts with drivers
3. No Keeper liability - the NTK is not compliant with the requirements of POFA2012
4. Signage incapable of being read - no contract with driver
5. Unreasonable & Unfair Charge - a penalty that cannot be recovered


To counter they have submitted the evidence in the below link (PDF files & personal information is redacted)

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1u81vmwh6nlzqwk/AACo9heQqViElUKqRIeoOchOa?dl=0

I know this is a very important stage of the appeal, I must scrutinise their evidence but they have really provided a lot of detail.

Is there anything I can say to discredit some or all of their points in the evidence?

Please let me know.

Thanks

Le_Kirk

Your point no. 1 is old and will not stand up anywhere.

Why not use the standard appeal text in blue from the NEWBIE sticky first post.  This is designed to prevent posters giving any more info to the PPC than they need, particularly the driver!

Umkomaas

Your appeal points 1 and 5 have no traction. The Supreme Court's judgment in ParkingEye v Beavis really put paid to those, I'm afraid. 

2. The 'Landowner Authority' looks like one point you can take issue with. Clearly with names and positions heavily redacted you (nor POPLA) can see who has signed this. Handwritten (scribbled) details hardly reflect the importance of a legal document of this nature. Forum regular @Fruitcake always gives sound advice on the issue of heavily redacted contracts, and hopefully he will pick up on this thread. 

3. You say that the NtK is not PoFA compliant - can you expand on that please, so we know where you're seeing the non-compliance. 

4. From the photos of the car park there seem to be a reasonable number of signs. However, the charge (£100) isn't prominent - as in the ParkingEye held up by The Supreme Court as an exemplar of how the charge should be shown, and POPLA have upheld other appeals on this basis - Euro Car Park signage, please read the POPLA Decisions Announcement which detail these decisions shown over the last 3 or 4 pages of that thread. 

Castle

The 24th April 2022 was a Sunday.

massop

Hi guys

I do apologise as I have mistakenly mislead you.

The redactions are all done by me to protect personal data (including the dates & times) as I was not sure what would be safe to post online and if it could hurt my case.

The confirmation of authority  is signed by the Club manager & the regional Manager.

All the dates and times do add up in the original letter. It was me who manually changed them to stop CEL doing a search in this forum.

In regards to my contesting reason with point 3

"3. No Keeper liability - the NTK is not compliant with the requirements of POFA2012"

This was really just a shot in the dark, they are compliant so this point cannot be used

Thanks for all your feedback though it is much appreciated.

Based on what has been said before it seems my only rebuttal is to do with signage

1 - the £100 charge is not prominent in the signage and none of the signs are individually lit (the parking convention was in the evening 19:30 ish so it was not light outside)

Please let me know if there is anything else I should pursue or just focus on this point.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Are their evidence photos of signs dated?

Are their evidence photos in the dark?

If you are 100% certain the PCN wording is compliant with the POFA (they have two versions, so don't assume it is, just due to dates) then concentrate on demolishing the signage evidence.

massop

Thanks again for your help.

I have responded with the below points based solely on signage.

I would like to contest the submitted evidence that supports point 3 "There is more than adequate signage in the car park"

You have not satisfied this statement due to the below points.

- The notice of charge is not sufficiently shown on the sign. Although the £100 is in bold it is using the 2nd smallest font on the signage, this makes it very hard to see from the rest of the text.

- None of the signs are individually lit as per your photo, the time of the original charge was in the evening and it would have been darker thus making the signs even harder to read

- You have not provided evidence of signage in similiar conditions to the date/time of original charge. Your evidence was taken at midday where sunlight is peak. The time of parking charge is evening (almost 20:00) this is not a like for like comparison.

I will update the POPLA appeals forum once I get a response.

Thanks again

massop

Appeal failed. unfortunately,

ill update the POLA appeals forum with full response.

Le_Kirk

I saw that on the POPLA page, did you really appeal on the basis of no GPEOL?  This hasn't been a serious claim for some years.  Anyway the good news (if there is any) is that POLA decisions are not binding on the motorist so you just wait for the inevitable barrage of debt collector letters, which of course can be ignored and LOC/LBC and possibly the N1 claim form which cannot be ignored.

Coupon-mad

Just ignore it. POPLA is not good enough.

The appellant’s case is the PCN is not a pre-estimate of loss. 

Surely not? Went out with the Ark.

massop

Hi guys,

So I now have a Claim sent to me by the courts end of last month. I only just saw it and it is exactly 14 days since the date of letter so I have filled "Acknowledgment of Service" and submitted online to buy me some more time to prepare.

I have ignored these criminals since POPLA declined my appeal so there has been no communication between us during this time.

When it comes to putting my defence forward, I intend to stick to the below points

1. No standing to pursue charges in the courts nor to make contracts with drivers
2. No Keeper liability - the NTK is not compliant with the requirements of POFA2012
3. Signage incapable of being read - no contract with driver

Do I need to issue a counterclaim to recover my time spent on this? Or is that done at a later stage?

As an FYI I ticked the "Dispute Jurisdiction box" as the court is in Northampton, I want them to move it closer to me if possible, was this the right thing to do?

Thanks in Advance