Britannia Parking - Appeal

Pokey86

Hi, i've used this forum in the past quite a while ago for dealing with parking tickets. I'm trying to fix this one on behalf of a family member who is adamant they paid but still got the NTK. I would just like to clarify two things.

1)

I've used the online appeal section on Britannia site  (As keeper, using the one size fits all template) but have recieved a response e-mail that has asked me to send them an eppeal (again?) via email. (This response letter also has extra pictures of the car and signage at the location)

Am i sending the one size fits all template appeal again and just waiting until i can appeal to POPLA?

2)

This PCN is the same location as this one at PEPIPOO

http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t125736.html

someone stated in this thread in regards to the NTK on the other thread (pic - https://postimg.cc/gallery/ibh3pvam/)

"Not compliant with POFA 9 (2) (e) missing, it references that date issued but does not actually specify it. And that was from a quick scan."

Can anyone clarify what they mean by this? As the one i'm chasing is identical to this i would imagine i can use this to support the appeal.

Thanks in advance. And apologies for the query early in the process, i'm not trying to waste anyone's time.

Coupon-mad

I would disagree. That's good enough on POFA wording.  

Does the company number on the bottom of the NTK match the company number on the signs?  Often Britannia have a problem being consistent re which version of 'Britannia' is doing what.

What happened when the victim just complained to the landowner and asked them to cancel the PCN?

And what exactly does the letter say about sending something by email? Are you sure that reply isn't just asking who the driver was (which the victim obviously doesn't say)?

Why didn't they add to the appeal that the driver did pay for parking and assumes it is a minor 'keying error' situation for which the PCN must be cancelled?

If they paid in full, it must be a keying error.

Pokey86

First thing i did was contact the pub twice. first time they said no manager was available and they couldn't help and 2nd time while i got through to manager I was told to contact britannia quite stubbornly. This pub is close to hospital and alot of people use it as parking. The driver did not go in the pub, i'm presuming that's why they are reluctant to help.

--

This is the body of the response i got after sending through the online appeal section

https://ibb.co/jHfBktZ

it thanks the keeper for the appeal but then states it has put the PCN on hold for the keeper to submit a valid appeal. Which has confused me somewhat.

--

regarding the keying error, perhaps an error on my part. the Newbie thread led me to believe that details like that were irrelevant and would get rejected anyway so i was looking more at this 'technicality' that i had found in the other thread. (that you have just said is likely not viable) Only thing i added to the template was that the driver of the vehicle was elderly and had difficulty moving.

--

Ive got pictures of the signage at the pub that they provided in the response but i can't see the small print enough to read the company number. I'll pop to the pub tomorrow to confirm.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

the driver of the vehicle was elderly and had difficulty moving.

OK, so take the opportunity to reconfirm that (after all, they offered you a second chance to add to the appeal) and state that it is likely to have been a keying error.  This might not be a number 'similar' to the VRM. It could be just a car VRM that doesn't match any vehicle in the car park at the time. The BPA CoP recognises this. and requires AOS members to also check for 'major keying errors' not just similar VRMs.

To establish whether this was the problem (perhaps the wrong VRM entirely or a partial entry) you require a partially redacted copy of the machine log. Not the 'exempt list log' (from inside the pub) but the log of payments made at the machine outside.  Have Britannia identified a possible major VRM error - a vehicle not in the car park at the time - where a payment of £x was made in cash? If so, then that is the elderly driver's payment, on the balance of probabilities, and you require sight of the partially redacted log and expect the matter to be offered to be settled at £20 as the BPA CoP requires.

Pokey86

I have sent off the appeal, i also confrimed with the driver that they had definitely paid, and how much they paid. The only issue i foresee is they do not recall keying in a registration (This is not to say they didn't) but they are positive on the amount put in the machine.

I'll update.

Pokey86

Hi

Sorry for the delay but they have finally responded, once to confirm they received my appeal and would reply in less than 35 days and again with a rejection. however they have effectively ignored my request for the partially redacted machine log. It mentions now that I can appeal to POPLA

i plan to submit the appeal and state they failed to fulfil my request for the machine log, and appear to have ignored the appeal email altogether. Which means they have failed to investigate the matter. Sent along with my request email and their response.

does this sound satisfactory or should I be adding anything else?


Snippets of the emails sent to me below 

Coupon-mad

does this sound satisfactory

No. Not enough.

 or should I be adding anything else?

For POPLA appeals?...yes, as stated and set out with links, in the POPLA section of the NEWBIES thread.