PCN issued at Matisse road Hounslow by private parking solutions (London) limited - appeal rejected

wajira27

B789 said:

wajira27 said:
No I didn't speak to the warden, I was observing them after the event and they were quite arrogant.  I am sure this area is a very lucrative ground for them.  They catch many innocent drivers per hour!

I was trying to establish whether you had mentioned to the "warden" about your emergency due to your child's illness (disability?). Are you just saying that the "warden" looked arrogant? Did the "warden" actually place the NtD or PCN on your windscreen?

What does the PCN actually state as the reason for the charge? Is it a "Parking" Charge Notice?

I am assuming you are referring to Private Parking Solutions London Ltd when you say PPC. According to the BPA reference to them, they only issue tickets and don't use ANPR.

I think you may have read on the other thread about the person who lost their POPLA appeal for stopping in the same spot as you. If I remember correctly, the tea-boy at POPLA who was on duty that day "assessed" that a contract had been formed by the forbidding sign. An impossibility. Just goes to show how unreliable POPLA are.

You will prepare your POPLA appeal based on your technical points and also do some research on other cases where stopping to attend to an emergency or a small vicissitude for a short period is not considered parking. You will probably need to highlight the fact that their PCN is probably claiming a breach of contract. In order to make a contract there have to be three things... an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. If the sign is forbidding, then there is no offer. If nothing was offered, then there was nothing to accept. Had the sign offered something which you could accept, it would be the consideration. The consideration would normally be any item (such as a time period granted for parking) that is agreed upon by both parties to have a value that may be exchanged in a contract. Only if you breached the terms of that contract, would you then be liable, for example, a charge which would need to be very obvious in the terms of the contract.

Explaining it in simplistic terms as above to the POPLA assessor/teaboy/cleaner, is probably necessary as we have already seen them call a forbidding sign a contract that can be breached. If it fails at POPLA, never mind. It wouldn't be a surprise and you then move on to a possible court claim, which is much better as it can now be defended by an independent arbitrator.

Also, if your child condition can be considered as a protected characteristic, it may be worthwhile informing PPS about it, why you needed to stop because of it and why they now need discontinue because they have been made aware of it and continuing would be a breach of the law.

I have drafted below regarding the contract law... can you confirm if this is OK or if I am missing anything important?

"PPS have indicated that I am in breach of their terms and conditions. I dispute that as there was no contract formed between PPS and I, as first I didn’t see the notice and secondly I didn’t agreed to their terms and conditions. In order to form a contract 3 elements needs to be completed. Namely an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. If the PPS sign is forbidding, then there is no offer. If nothing was offered, then there was nothing to accept. Also the sign didn’t offer something which I could accept which would have been the consideration. The consideration would have been if PPS were offering a time period for parking for exchange of a payment. But they were not offering anything in their notice. None of the above conditions were met for me to in breach of any contract".

Thanks

B789

wajira27 said:
"PPS have indicated that I the driver am was in breach of their terms and conditions. As the registered keeper I dispute that as there was no contract formed between PPS and I the driver, as first I didn’t see the notice and secondly I didn’t agreed to their terms and conditions any signs were not prominent or visible. In order to form a contract 3 elements needs to be completed. Namely an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. The only sign that was seen later was a forbidding sign. If the PPS As the sign is forbidding, then there is can be no offer. If nothing was offered, then there was nothing to accept. Also The sign didn’t offer something anything which I the driver could accept which would have been the consideration and therefore a contract was not able to be formed. The For example, a consideration wcould have been if PPS were offering a time period period of time for parking for in exchange of for a payment. But However, PPS they were not offering anything in their sign notice. None of the above conditions were met for me the driver to be in breach of any contract".

Edited as above. However, if this is for your POPLA appeal, please remind me, was the identity of the driver revealed? You can and should add as many other points as you can. Just search for similar POPLA appeals. You only need one point to win your appeal. The parking company needs all of theirs.

wajira27

B789 said:

wajira27 said:
"PPS have indicated that I the driver am was in breach of their terms and conditions. As the registered keeper I dispute that as there was no contract formed between PPS and I the driver, as first I didn’t see the notice and secondly I didn’t agreed to their terms and conditions any signs were not prominent or visible. In order to form a contract 3 elements needs to be completed. Namely an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. The only sign that was seen later was a forbidding sign. If the PPS As the sign is forbidding, then there is can be no offer. If nothing was offered, then there was nothing to accept. Also The sign didn’t offer something anything which I the driver could accept which would have been the consideration and therefore a contract was not able to be formed. The For example, a consideration wcould have been if PPS were offering a time period period of time for parking for in exchange of for a payment. But However, PPS they were not offering anything in their sign notice. None of the above conditions were met for me the driver to be in breach of any contract".

Edited as above. However, if this is for your POPLA appeal, please remind me, was the identity of the driver revealed? You can and should add as many other points as you can. Just search for similar POPLA appeals. You only need one point to win your appeal. The parking company needs all of theirs.

Thanks for wording.  I will do some more  research on similar cases as suggested. 
 it's my wife's car and I mentioned I was driving at the time in my appeal. 

Umkomaas

wajira27 said:

B789 said:

wajira27 said:
"PPS have indicated that I the driver am was in breach of their terms and conditions. As the registered keeper I dispute that as there was no contract formed between PPS and I the driver, as first I didn’t see the notice and secondly I didn’t agreed to their terms and conditions any signs were not prominent or visible. In order to form a contract 3 elements needs to be completed. Namely an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. The only sign that was seen later was a forbidding sign. If the PPS As the sign is forbidding, then there is can be no offer. If nothing was offered, then there was nothing to accept. Also The sign didn’t offer something anything which I the driver could accept which would have been the consideration and therefore a contract was not able to be formed. The For example, a consideration wcould have been if PPS were offering a time period period of time for parking for in exchange of for a payment. But However, PPS they were not offering anything in their sign notice. None of the above conditions were met for me the driver to be in breach of any contract".

Edited as above. However, if this is for your POPLA appeal, please remind me, was the identity of the driver revealed? You can and should add as many other points as you can. Just search for similar POPLA appeals. You only need one point to win your appeal. The parking company needs all of theirs.

Thanks for wording.  I will do some more  research on similar cases as suggested. 
 it's my wife's car and I mentioned I was driving at the time in my appeal. 

If this is your wife's car, is she the registered keeper named on the V5C (logbook)? Whose name appears on the Notice to Keeper (first letter received from the parking firm) and any subsequent correspondence?

wajira27

Umkomaas said:

wajira27 said:

B789 said:

wajira27 said:
"PPS have indicated that I the driver am was in breach of their terms and conditions. As the registered keeper I dispute that as there was no contract formed between PPS and I the driver, as first I didn’t see the notice and secondly I didn’t agreed to their terms and conditions any signs were not prominent or visible. In order to form a contract 3 elements needs to be completed. Namely an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. The only sign that was seen later was a forbidding sign. If the PPS As the sign is forbidding, then there is can be no offer. If nothing was offered, then there was nothing to accept. Also The sign didn’t offer something anything which I the driver could accept which would have been the consideration and therefore a contract was not able to be formed. The For example, a consideration wcould have been if PPS were offering a time period period of time for parking for in exchange of for a payment. But However, PPS they were not offering anything in their sign notice. None of the above conditions were met for me the driver to be in breach of any contract".

Edited as above. However, if this is for your POPLA appeal, please remind me, was the identity of the driver revealed? You can and should add as many other points as you can. Just search for similar POPLA appeals. You only need one point to win your appeal. The parking company needs all of theirs.

Thanks for wording.  I will do some more  research on similar cases as suggested. 
 it's my wife's car and I mentioned I was driving at the time in my appeal. 

If this is your wife's car, is she the registered keeper named on the V5C (logbook)? Whose name appears on the Notice to Keeper (first letter received from the parking firm) and any subsequent correspondence?

Hi All,

I just received a new PCN today dated 11th April in the post on my name.

As said car is registered under my wife's name, and the original PCN dated 14th March came under her name.

But with my appeal before I said I was the driver and not my wife. They rejected my appeal and said that I have exhausted their appeal process and provided the POPLA reference number.

Looks like now they have reissued the PCN on my name again with the date on PCN as 11th April. I checked their website and the date of the PCN shown as 11th April now. Looks like everything is reset again now. New PCN notice received today says that I can pay the reduced charge of £60 within 14 days and I have 28 days to appeal etc. from the date of issue.

But the PCN reference number is the same on both PCN notices received.

My question is, should I again appeal to private parking solution London limited?

In any case looks like I have more time now, should I use all that time now? (e.g. – appeal again within 28 days etc and repeat the process?)

Coupon-mad

If there is a rejection letter with POPLA Code, what's the date on that and was it sent to you or your wife?

wajira27

Coupon-mad said:

If there is a rejection letter with POPLA Code, what's the date on that and was it sent to you or your wife?

The rejection letter is addressed to my name and the date on the rejection letter is 27.03.2023.

B789

OK, so you've admitted being the driver which is a pity, as it could have been a winning point for any appeal if the PCN was not PoFA compliant. You are now back to square one with you being the admitted driver and you can appeal as though you have just received the PCN.

Just adapt the template "One size fits all" appeal from the Newbies/FAQ thread but you can drop anything about only being the keeper:

Re PCN number: 

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner.

I don't think it is worth going into much detail at this stage as they will most likely refuse the appeal anyway. If anyone else thinks it is worth adding the lack of contract issue at this stage, I'm sure they'll say so.

What you are aiming for is a POPLA code but even if the teaboy at POPLA thinks you had a contract, you ideally want this to go to a court claim where a completely independent arbiter (the judge) can decide whether you have a debt or not.

wajira27

B789 said:

OK, so you've admitted being the driver which is a pity, as it could have been a winning point for any appeal if the PCN was not PoFA compliant. You are now back to square one with you being the admitted driver and you can appeal as though you have just received the PCN.

Just adapt the template "One size fits all" appeal from the Newbies/FAQ thread but you can drop anything about only being the keeper:

Re PCN number: 

I dispute your 'parking charge', as the keeper of the vehicle. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Since your PCN is a vague template, I require an explanation of the allegation and your evidence. You must include a close up actual photograph of the sign you contend was at the location on the material date as well as your images of the vehicle.

If the allegation concerns a PDT machine, the data supplied in response to this appeal must include the record of payments made - showing partial VRNs - and an explanation of the reason for the PCN, because your Notice does not explain it.

If the allegation involves an alleged overstay of minutes, your evidence must include the actual grace period agreed by the landowner.

I don't think it is worth going into much detail at this stage as they will most likely refuse the appeal anyway. If anyone else thinks it is worth adding the lack of contract issue at this stage, I'm sure they'll say so.

What you are aiming for is a POPLA code but even if the teaboy at POPLA thinks you had a contract, you ideally want this to go to a court claim where a completely independent arbiter (the judge) can decide whether you have a debt or not.

I didn’t know about this forum prior appealing the PCN.

Only came across the MSE forum when I was searching the PPS and appeals etc. on the net.

Also I wasn’t sure how to appeal without saying who the driver was…. If it was appealed based on the PCN received, would it not imply that register keeper was the driver by default? They were asking to provide the details of the driver if the registered keeper was not driving at the time. Also I was thinking that they would not allow to change the driver details later if I had submitted the appeal without talking about who the driver was at the time. My point is if I had submitted an appeal without referring to the driver at the time, will it not by default the registered keeper be the driver?

Anyway as I can see there is an issue with the process they have followed.

I admitted that I was the driver when appealing against the 1st PCN received even though it was addressed to my wife who was the registered owner. Then PPS rejection letter was addressed to my name and they said I have exhausted their appeal process. Also I was given a POPLA reference as well. Then they issue a new PCN with a new date etc. resetting all. Something is not correct about it? Do I have any legal advantage over this?

If PPS were to issue a new PCN, they should have replied to my appeal and said that they will re issue the PCN under my name and that I have to submit the appeal on the new PCN once issued. But by rejecting my appeal and giving the POPLA reference they received and responded to my appeal.

B789

The Newbies/FAQ thread explains all about why the driver should not be identified. The PPC does not know the identity of the driver. They only know the identity of the RK. If the PPC has not followed the requirements under PoFA 2012, it cannot transfer liability to the RK. They are not allowed to "assume" that the RK was also the "driver". If no one has told them who the driver is, then they just don't know. They don't have some magical database they can access with every driver's identity and photo listed in it. When it comes to POPLA or even better, court, the Claimant would be put to strict proof of the driver's identity. You are making the typical suppositions of most gullible victims that you are somehow obliged to reveal the driver's identity because the big, bad, scary parking company has told you to. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Anyway, that's all academic now because your identity as the driver has been revealed. Was/is there any mention of "Protection of Freedoms Act 2012" mentioned anywhere on the PCN?