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

wajira27

Hi All,

I had a second thought and planning to submit the POPLA appeal based on the POPLA reference provided to me by PPS on the initial rejection of my appeal. But I only have 3 days before the 28 day deadline for POPLA submission. I need to finalise the details of my appeal if I am to meet this deadline.

I have drafted my POPLA appeal and would like your comments, suggestions and any improvements. Also any advice if there are any other points that I can add. Also finally your view on my defence, is it strong enough?

For some reason I am unable to copy the text of my appeal here, it says it’s too long. Tried attaching as a word document and that didn’t work either!

Please advise how I can publish my draft appeal for your review?

Coupon-mad

POPLA Codes last till day 33 so you have a whole week.

Boat_to_Bolivia

Split it over 2 reply boxes. 

As I recall others have mentioned you have 32  33 days to use your POPLA code.

Edited my post as it's 33 days and don't want to cause confusion to others who may read this.

wajira27

See below my draft POPLA appeal, any comment, suggestions, improvements much appreciated. Also please advise if there are any other points that I can add. Also finally your view on my defence, is it strong enough?

Also you can see the list of evidence that I am planning to submit as well. They are either Photographs or maps etc.

Also this is the 1st time I am dealing with POPLA, so no idea how this works!

Just wondering best way to submit the appeal, can I copy paste the information on to POPLA and upload the evidence photographs and files?

OR is it best to create a document with all the text and pictures with it. That is providing evidence within the same file after the text for each point and then upload as a PDF document.

I have seen few PDF docs in the forum POPLA section with the latter approach, but not sure if they are submitted in the same format or just added as a reference for forum member’s benefit.

I have copied the draft appeal over few comment boxes as suggested.

 Draft appeal -

Dear Sir / Madam,  

Parking Charge Notice Number XXXXXXXX

POPLA Code: XXXXXXXX 

Date of incident: XXXXXXXXX

Driver at the time - XXXXXXXXXX

Driver address – XXXXXXXXXX 

I was issued the above parking charge notice by private parking solutions London limited (referred as PPS hereafter) on XXth March. This parking charge relates to an incident took place on Saturday March XXth on Matisse road, Hounslow. PPS have rejected my appeal without addressing any of the points I raised. I am not liable for the alleged parking charge and wish to appeal.

I am disputing the parking charge issued by PPS on below grounds.

1.    I stopped the vehicle on the parking bay in question briefly to attend a medical emergency my son (who is a child) was facing. I did not see or notice the “No parking sign” before entering the parking bay. So my actions were not deliberate. 

2.    The parking sign is not clear in reference to the parking bay and is located far from the parking bay. There is a wide pedestrian way (public foot path) between the parking bay and the notice. 

3.    No grace period or observation period allowed for the driver to observe the notice and understand the content and to make an informed decision. Non-compliance with BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) 

4.    PPS have not made adequate provisions to show or distinguish/highlight this parking bay from other parking bays around the area which are free to park. 

5.    I dispute PPS claim that the driver is in breach of terms and conditions as stated in the parking notice on site. I dispute this as there was no contract formed between PPS and the driver at the time. 

6.    I am challenging this PCN on technical grounds as the location and the description of the incident is incorrect as stated on PCN. Therefore I am not liable for any charge under road traffic act 2004 and any subsequent updates. ( location on a map is provided as evidence) 

7.    PPS parking warden is in breach of BPA code of practice – section 9 (Professionalism). Unprofessional behaviour, actions and conduct of the PPS parking warden intimidated and delayed me in moving my vehicle away from the parking bay. Parking warden didn’t follow the BPA code of conduct and lacked professionalism. 

8.    I am challenging that the evidence produced by PPS (photographs) were not collected in any orderly manner following the procedure and guidelines. As a result I am challenging the credibility of evidence produced by PPS.  

I have explained each point above in detail below

1.    I had to pull into the parking bay due to a medical emergency my son was facing. My son is a child and was quite unwell on that day. My son is suffering from a long-term chronic Eczema, asthma and highly allergic to conditions around him.  He is on continuous treatment and at high risk due to this condition and is required to carry an epi pen all the time. Also due to this condition his skin get badly damaged/wounded and get infected. This triggers a severe and unbearable pain and often gets cramps due to swollen lymph nodes. He is medically vulnerable and when he is in pain or discomfort someone needs to attend to him soon as possible to carry out medical procedure or provide comfort. His situation can change quite quickly and drastically within very short space of time. This is the reason I had to make a quick stop to check on my son as he complained of severe pain/discomfort and was poorly on that day. I did not notice or see the “no parking sign prior to entering the parking bay. This is also a very busy and narrow road, hence the reason I moved into a vacant space without stopping on the road for safety as I was attending to my son. (I have attached a letter from Doctor as evidence, even though I have all the information regarding his medical condition, I am not comfortable proving lot of information due its nature and sensitivity. But if you think you may need any other Information, please do let me know). 

2.    That the “No parking notice” is not clear that it refers to the parking bay in question. The notice is on a wall and there is a wide pedestrian way (Public foot path) between the notice and the parking bay. As is the case notice is some distance away from where I stopped and it’s not noticeable straight away due to the angle and distance. Also a large content of details is in small letters and not legible from the parking bay and even more difficult to read from inside a vehicle (You can refer to PPS Pictures - I have attached). When I pulled into the bay (reversed parked) notice was probably obstructed by the vehicle parked parallel to me and in the other parking bay in the front.  Also PPS cannot expect drivers to read notices on the side of the road while driving which is unsafe. Given where the notice is displayed, for me to make an informed decision, I need to first notice that there is a sign on the wall, then come out of the vehicle and walk up to the notice to read the full content of the notice to make an informed decision. This process will take at least few minutes, at least 4-5 minutes should be allowed. But PPS have not given any observation period or a reasonable time period for me to observe the notice and act accordingly.

wajira27

Continuation.....

3. PPS has not followed the BPA code of practice for its members. Not allowed a grace period or adequate observation period.

 BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) states that: 

The driver must have the chance to consider the Terms and Conditions before entering into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having had that opportunity, the driver decides not to park but chooses to leave the car park, you must provide them with a reasonable consideration period to leave, before the driver can be bound by your parking contract. The amount of time in these instances will vary dependant on site size and type but it must be a minimum of 5 minutes. 

As per their time stamped photographic evidence you can see I was only there for 1 minute 34 seconds. The 1st photograph was taken at 12:53:31 pm and the last photograph was taken at 12:55:05 pm which was taken as I was moving my car away. Also PPS have not mentioned anywhere in the PCN how long I stayed in the parking bay. 

4.    PPS have not made adequate provisions to show or distinguish this parking bay from other parking bays around the area (it is not obvious or not marked adequately to highlight that this is private land). I couldn’t distinguish this parking space from other residential parking spaces around the area which are free for parking after 12.30pm on Saturdays. This parking bay is located between a public road and a public footpath. It is not located within a private land or in a separate private premises/car park. It is impossible to detect that this is a private land unless you have prior knowledge. 

5.    PPS have indicated that the driver was in breach of their terms and conditions stated in the parking sign. As the driver I dispute that as there was no contract formed between PPS and the driver, as any signs were not prominent or visible or noticed. In order to form a contract 3 main elements needs to be completed. Namely an offer, an acceptance and a consideration. The only sign that was seen later was a forbidding sign. As the sign is forbidding, then there can be no offer. If nothing was offered, then there was nothing to accept. The sign didn’t offer anything which the driver could accept which would have been the consideration and therefore a contract was not able to be formed. For example, a consideration could have been if PPS were offering a period of time for parking in exchange for a payment. However, PPS were not offering anything in their sign/notice. No conditions were met for the driver to be in breach of. 

 

6.    Location and description of the incident appears to be incorrect as stated in the PCN. I believe it is quite important for PPS to get the location and the description correct for a PCN to be valid. Therefore I am not liable for any charge under road traffic act 2004 and any subsequent updates. On this ground this PCN should have been cancelled. The location of the incident is named as Holloway Street TW3 Zone A&B, but clearly the incident took place on Matisse Road, Hounslow (as marked on attached map) with a dead end (No through road). Vehicles cannot enter Holloway Street TW3 (it’s a pedestrian only street) and no through road to any other roads (See picture provided). Also I cannot see any signage on site or surrounding area indicating a parking area marked as Holloway Street Zones A & B even checking few time after the incident.  PPS letter also states that I entered a car park and parked in a no parking area. This is incorrect as I did not enter any car park managed by PPS as explained above and it’s a parking bay along the Matisse road which is a public road. PPS ignored this point without addressing at all.

(Parking space on Matisse road where incident took place marked on a map – provided as evidence. On same map you can locate Holloway Street much further down). You can independently verify this by reviewing the Hounslow council maps or any other area map.

If PPS can refer to Matisse road as Holloway Street in their PCN which are clearly two different locations, they can refer to any road around the area as Holloway Street in my opinion. If this point is not accepted, I would like PPS or you to kindly point out to the revenant law that makes this PCN valid even though the location and other information is incorrect.

 

7.    I was distracted and delayed by the parking warden’s actions and unprofessional behaviour. PPS parking warden’s (whom I didn’t recognise until after the event) actions intimidated and confused me and at least delayed me for 40 – 50 seconds removing the car from the parking bay. I noticed him instantly getting out of an unmarked vehicle parked parallel to me on the other side of the road dressed in pain black clothes and started taking photographs of my vehicle in an intimidating and suspicious manner from all angles. He got into action soon I moved into the parking bay and did not give any reason or indicate that he is a parking warden. To add to my suspicion he was trying to disguise me to believe he was doing something else. As mentioned, he was dressed in plain black clothes (Evidence provided) and I had no way of identifying him as a parking warden or what he was up to. Clearly he did not follow BPA guide lines on Parking warden’s dress code or any indication/ badge or identity that they have to display for public to identify that he represent a parking company. As you can imagine I was quite terrified and confused the way he came across and by his actions. For a moment I was trying assess the situation as to what is going on as a normal person would do in such a circumstance. I wasn’t sure if he was trying to cause any harm or up to something more sinister. All this happened simultaneous and quite quickly. All this time I was in the driving seat and I didn’t not recognise him to be a parking warden. I believe actions by PPS warden is deliberate and done consciously to confuse and intimidate innocent people so that they can benefit from that distraction they cause. The parking wardens actions contributed to more than half of the 94 seconds I was there in the parking bay.

This information may not relevant to my appeal but wanted to mention anyway -  I am disgusted by PPS double standards and hypocrisy and conduct, the vehicle the PPS parking warden was in had parked on a double yellow line and obstructing the pedestrian way (see evidence provided). You wouldn’t expect a person who is there to enforce parking to breach the parking law?  As it is illegal to park on a double yellow line and also on a pedestrian way obstructing it.

 

BPA’s Code of Practice: professionalism (9.1)   states that: 

•       Your front-line operational staff wear a uniform and carry a photo-identity card that is visible and available for inspection by drivers.

•       You deal with drivers and other members of the public in a professional way, avoiding using aggressive or threatening language. 

BPA’s Code of Practice: professionalism (9.5)   states that:

•       You must not use predatory or misleading tactics to lure drivers into incurring parking charges. Such instances will be viewed as a serious and sanction able instance of non-compliance and may go to the Professional Conduct Panel. 

 

8.    I am very concerned and therefore challenging the credibility of PPS and its employees and how they have collected and processed evidence provided.

Given the poor reputation and predatory conduct and the behaviour of the PPS parking warden, I am challenging the credibility of this company and evidence provided. Also I have come across very disturbing information what other people have experienced with this company. These evidence were collected using a normal hand phone and also I challenge the competence and the credibility of the person who collected this information.

        PPS have confirmed in response to my appeal that this parking warden is one of 

        their own onsite parking wardens and not 3rd party.

 

        I am raising below questions regarding how and what procedure PPS followed when collecting evidence?

·      What steps flowed to collect the information in an orderly manner?

·      Are devices (In this case a personal mobile phone) used permitted to use for this purpose.

·      What checks they carry out on the devise before they collect the evidence?

(Do they carry out checks and confirmations to make sure date and time information is correct etc. any evidence available?, check log etc.).

·      What training the parking warden is given to handle this information?

·      Has the parking warden signed any non-disclosure agreement as he is handling/ keeping sensitive information about public in his phone?

 

 

Also I am challenging on the basis that this information/evidence is not collected using a Fixed CCTV camera or any other similar camera. There is a high probability they can easily manipulate/ fabricate the information collected using a hand phone to their advantage (E.g. change time stamp on photographs). Even though PPS time stamped photographs show I was there for 94 seconds, it could have been less.

 

 

Despite as explained above I moved the car as quickly as possible when I realised something is not right. The parking warden from PPS stood there and photographed the situation from the moment I moved the car into the parking bay and until I moved it out. Therefore PPS should have information to verify how long I was in the parking bay.

I hoped as a reputable company and a member of BPA, the PPS would allow a reasonable time (observation/grace period) to any uninformed driver who unknowingly enter this parking bay to observe the no parking notice (which is not noticeable straight away and other reasons as explained above), understand it and remove the car away safely. But it appears that it is not the case based on the response I had from PPS. As explained above, if not for the intimidating and suspicious behaviour of PPS parking warden which intimidated and distracted me, I would have removed the car much quicker after checking if my son was OK. Even though I pointed this out in my appeal with PPS, they didn’t address my point. Actions of this company no doubt bring disrepute to all the trade bodies and its members that they are part of and represent.

Given this is a caused due the situation I faced with my son on that day as explained and due to the actions of the PPS parking warden which put me under lot of stress and confusion contributed to delay in my response, still I have acted quickly and removed my car. Given all this I am sure there should be at least 3-5 minutes observation /grace period for such situations before they issue a PCN.

 

I have explained the incident on 11th March on Matisse road in sufficient detail. I am a law-abiding citizen and professional and do not act recklessly at any time. I don’t

believe I committed any wrongdoing and have not caused any business loss, damage, or inconvenience to PPS or its customers. As you can understand I entered the said parking bay unknowingly to attend a medical emergency but acted swiftly to remove the vehicle as quickly as possible even though I was disrupted by their parking warden. For me PPS and its parking warden’s actions are morally wrong and as a matter of principle I am not prepared to accept a fine for something I have not done. I hope you will consider the details and evidence provided in making your decision.

If you need any additional details, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Evidence provided

1.      Doctor’s letter confirming my son’s condition.

2.      Location of the incident on map (Matisse road) and evidence where Holloway Street is located.

3.      Picture showing the distance between the parking bay and notice.

4.      Road sign showing dead end on Matisse road (no through road to Holloway street)

5.      Holloway street road sign – with no through road information.

6.      Picture of the parking warden from front view ( two photographs)

7.      Picture of the parking warden from rear view

8.      How the parking wardens vehicle was parked – On double yellow line and obstructing pedestrian way

 

Thank you. 

XXXXXXXXXX

wajira27

Boat_to_Bolivia said:

Split it over 2 reply boxes. 

As I recall others have mentioned you have 32 days to use your POPLA code.

Just checked the POPLA website and it say the code only last 28 days from date of issue. 

KeithP

wajira27 said:

Boat_to_Bolivia said:

Split it over 2 reply boxes. 

As I recall others have mentioned you have 32 days to use your POPLA code.

Just checked the POPLA website and it say the code only last 28 days from date of issue. 

You have 33 days.

B789

You didn't mention anything about the Equalities Act 2010 and indirect discrimination. No mention of Jopson v Homeguard and small vicissitude.

As @KeithP has mentioned above, we know the POPLA website says 28 days but we know from experience that it actually lasts 33 days.

Coupon-mad

Coupon-mad said:

POPLA Codes last till day 33 so you have a whole week.

As above.  We are not wrong.  Do them all the time.

wajira27

B789 said:

You didn't mention anything about the Equalities Act 2010 and indirect discrimination. No mention of Jopson v Homeguard and small vicissitude.

As @KeithP has mentioned above, we know the POPLA website says 28 days but we know from experience that it actually lasts 33 days.

Thanks,  can you please explain a bit how it relates to my incident and context please. Or point me in the right direction. 
All this is new to me....what I have written is based on my research last few days. 

Really appreciate your assistance!