Car Parking Partnership Fine advice.

B789

young077 said:
80% of that evidence pack is a cut and paste job aswell.

It should be simple I tried to pay a couple of ways and none of it was successful so I left and parked elsewhere. Due to only one of two machines being in working order and your typical automated telephone service being time consuming and difficult to use (about 7 minutes to realise I wasn't getting anywhere) it all took the 16 minutes I was there. 

Of course, it is a cut-and-paste job. They churn thousands of these PCNs out every day. What is hilarious is if it goes to court and they put in their witness statement how the defendant has used cut-and-paste in their defence/WS when they are doing exactly the same. But you already know how these bottom-dwellers are also hypocrites as well as scammers.

Your appeal is reasonable based on the timings and the frustration of contract due to their faulty technology. just don't worry if POPLA doesn't agree. They do look after their chums as they are all part of the BPA.

young077

Thanks guys. I'll sit for hour or so this evening and read some of the examples on the forum and reply to the evidence tomorrow evening or Monday.

young077

I have spent a good hour or two looking through the forum and there is so much information I am struggling to work out what to put against the evidence pack.

Things that I thin I need to put:

The letter not being proof of anything and not even being in the same name as the PCN. Not sure how to word it?

Them saying they had two machines on site when only one is working?

No mention of how long the grace period is? 

Frustration of contract due to technology not accepting payment.

Do I need to be finding and adding examples of case law?

I have tried to work all this out without asking again for help but I have struggled sorry.

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

POPLA will like that evidence so I don't think you have much to worry about. Just create a word doc with all of that wording (change it from 'you' to 'the operator' of course because this stage is addressed to POPLA not the PPC).  Include the evidence images embedded (so you only upload one document.

Add as a separate appeal point the standard 'no landowner authority' appeal point you saw in the third post of the NEWBIES thread that's all about POPLA and which box to tick.

The above was all you need.

young077

Coupon-mad said:

Coupon-mad said:

POPLA will like that evidence so I don't think you have much to worry about. Just create a word doc with all of that wording (change it from 'you' to 'the operator' of course because this stage is addressed to POPLA not the PPC).  Include the evidence images embedded (so you only upload one document.

Add as a separate appeal point the standard 'no landowner authority' appeal point you saw in the third post of the NEWBIES thread that's all about POPLA and which box to tick.

The above was all you need.

Should I reply to their evidence pack?

Coupon-mad

Yes, reiterating the main issues and reminding POPLA that you evidenced everything you did.

Don't talk about grace periods.  It doesn't have to be displayed anywhere.

young077

fisherjim said:

But that contract is not between CPP and the landowner it's between Parking Eye and the land owner, even though they own CPP they are run as two separate companies so that contract isn't valid evidence as B789 has pointed out.

Just submitted some comments and notice that operator name says-

Parking Eye Ltd including Car Parking Partnership (CPP) - EW

Should the letter of authority still say CPP?

young077

Just a quick thanks to all who helped with advice. I received a reply from POPLA yesterday stating my appeal was successful on the grounds of me being unable to enter into the contract and my evidence showing attempts to pay were sufficient to show that 16 minutes was not an excessive amount of time and I was not considered parked.

B789

Well done. Can you please post the Assessors summary on the POPLA thread at the top of the forum?