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

wajira27

KeithP said:

There seems to be a little confusion here between a) the contract between the driver and the parking company, and b) the contract between the parking company and the site owner.

Also, I suggest that this sentence...

The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago) even though there is an automatic renewal clause, no evidence provided to show this contract was renewed and is still in force.

Would be better as...
The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago).
Why provide the parking company with a 'get out'?

Point taken  - as I understand I shouldn't be mentioning about the automatic renewal clause.  I will say - no evidence to show contract was ever renewed. 
Thanks 

KeithP

wajira27 said:

KeithP said:

There seems to be a little confusion here between a) the contract between the driver and the parking company, and b) the contract between the parking company and the site owner.

Also, I suggest that this sentence...

The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago) even though there is an automatic renewal clause, no evidence provided to show this contract was renewed and is still in force.

Would be better as...
The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago).
Why provide the parking company with a 'get out'?

Point taken  -   I will say - no evidence to show contract was ever renewed. 

No that is not what I was suggesting.

If you were to say "no evidence to show contract was ever renewed", that will surely have the Claimant scrabbling around to knock up what they claim to be a contract renewal made several months ago.

Just say "The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021" and leave it at that.

Coupon-mad

And you can use my words but change ANPR to 'a lurking predatory ticketer who could see we were still in the car and took photos at skewed angles for a bounty, all within one minute, trying to mislead POPLA that the car was parked and left for a period of time. It wasn't'.

wajira27

Coupon-mad said:

And you can use my words but change ANPR to 'a lurking predatory ticketer who could see we were still in the car and took photos at skewed angles for a bounty, all within one minute, trying to mislead POPLA that the car was parked and left for a period of time. It wasn't'.

Thanks will use this.

wajira27

KeithP said:

wajira27 said:

KeithP said:

There seems to be a little confusion here between a) the contract between the driver and the parking company, and b) the contract between the parking company and the site owner.

Also, I suggest that this sentence...

The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago) even though there is an automatic renewal clause, no evidence provided to show this contract was renewed and is still in force.

Would be better as...
The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago).
Why provide the parking company with a 'get out'?

Point taken  -   I will say - no evidence to show contract was ever renewed. 

No that is not what I was suggesting.

If you were to say "no evidence to show contract was ever renewed", that will surely have the Claimant scrabbling around to knock up what they claim to be a contract renewal made several months ago.

Just say "The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021" and leave it at that.

Ok will do . thanks.

wajira27

wajira27 said:

KeithP said:

wajira27 said:

KeithP said:

There seems to be a little confusion here between a) the contract between the driver and the parking company, and b) the contract between the parking company and the site owner.

Also, I suggest that this sentence...

The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago) even though there is an automatic renewal clause, no evidence provided to show this contract was renewed and is still in force.

Would be better as...
The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021 (1 year 8 months ago).
Why provide the parking company with a 'get out'?

Point taken  -   I will say - no evidence to show contract was ever renewed. 

No that is not what I was suggesting.

If you were to say "no evidence to show contract was ever renewed", that will surely have the Claimant scrabbling around to knock up what they claim to be a contract renewal made several months ago.

Just say "The landowner contract provided by PPS expired on 01.09.2021" and leave it at that.

Ok will do . thanks.

My only reason to mention that “no evidence was present to confirm if the contract was ever renewed” - because I didn't want POPLA assessor to assume that the contract is renewed automatically due to the clause present in the contract and to reject my point - basically I was covering all bases and not leaving any room/gap for assumptions to make by POPLA

B789

I still think you should highlight to the POPLA assessor that, irrespective of what they decide regarding the validity of the contract between the landowner and the PPC, there was no contract between the driver and the PPC because of the forbidding sign.

Just two legs about "contracts" that you can use in your POPLA appeal. The PPC has to either rebut or lose and the assessor also knows this.

wajira27

B789 said:

I still think you should highlight to the POPLA assessor that, irrespective of what they decide regarding the validity of the contract between the landowner and the PPC, there was no contract between the driver and the PPC because of the forbidding sign.

Just two legs about "contracts" that you can use in your POPLA appeal. The PPC has to either rebut or lose and the assessor also knows this.

Yes i will, and this is one of my main points in the POPLA appeal as well.

wajira27

Please confirm in my comments to POPLA, should I  refer to my self as the "Driver"  or "I"  ?
Or does it matter even if I use both in different places?

B789

wajira27 said:

Please confirm in my comments to POPLA, should I  refer to my self as the "Driver"  or "I"  ?
Or does it matter even if I use both in different places?

Without trawling back through the whole thread, if you are not relying on PoFA and appealing as the driver and not the keeper, then it doesn't matter. If you are relying on PoFA and appealing only as the keeper, then you need to amend accordingly.