Parking fine appeal help please - Fistral Beach Initial Parking

Coupon-mad

No. I advised you not to put your full first name.

ParkingBabe

The appeal has been rejected by Initial Parking and I have been given POPLA code. What template shall I use now for POPLA appeal?

Le_Kirk

All POPLA appeal templates are in the NEWBIE sticky third post.

ParkingBabe

I have raised an appeal with POPLA based on a previous similar post.
The parking firm has sent a detailed reply.
POPLA has given us 7 days to reply. Should we reply to POPLA on any of the details furnished by Initial Parking or shall we wait for POPLA to do the assessment and give final reply?

KeithP

ParkingBabe said:

I have raised an appeal with POPLA based on a previous similar post.
The parking firm has sent a detailed reply.
POPLA has given us 7 days to reply. Should we reply to POPLA on any of the details furnished by Initial Parking or shall we wait for POPLA to do the assessment and give final reply?

In the third post of the NEWBIES thread it says...

You now need to be reading the words following that heading.

Coupon-mad

That's already answered in the NEWBIES thread

Whatever2023

The company can be held liable under something called ‘vicarious liability’, they don’t need POFA.

Castle

Whatever2023 said:

The company can be held liable under something called ‘vicarious liability’, they don’t need POFA.

That would only be true if the driver was there on company business, which seems unlikely. 

Coupon-mad

Whatever2023 said:

The company can be held liable under something called ‘vicarious liability’, they don’t need POFA.

Not correct.  Not with a consumer keeper.

Good old VCS (thankyou) has just handed us another appeal win confirming the legal position.  That's two now:

Here's VCS v Ian Edward, 2023:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/w0k19zxzlpf9eumu68u7b/VCS-v-EDWARDS-Transcript.pdf?rlkey=5t2gilebrjx7g0d6jmy32lou4&dl=0


And here's Excel v Smith, 2017:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xfx25wgm3nlqkyc/Claim No. C0DP9C4E:M17X062.pdf?dl=0

Captain Clampit: The gift that keeps on giving.

ParkingBabe

Hi All,

I am glad to say that my Appeal has been accepted by Popla. I have found that the contract furnished by operator to Popla has different timing of operation compare to what was on the site. POPLA has accepted my argument that the contract seems to be invalid and the operator has no right to manage parking. Please see details response below:


*******************************************************************
I am allowing this appeal, with my reasoning outlined below: The appellant has raised several grounds for appeal. However, my findings will focus on the Landowner Authority ground of appeal has persuaded me to allow the appeal. Within their grounds of appeal and within their comments, the appellant has questioned if the operator has authority to issue PCNs. The have questioned how the contract shows no expiry date and how the hours of operation on the contract is different to the hours of operation on the signs on site. They have said that this confirms that the contract is either incorrect, the signage is incorrect and that the operator is not following the terms of the contract. The British Parking Association has a Code of Practice which set the standards its parking operators need to comply with. Section 7.1 of the BPA Code of Practice outlines that parking operators must have written authorisation from the landowner or their agent, to manage the land in question. This can come in the form of a witness statement under Section 23.16B of the BPA Code of Practice or a full contract. Section 7.3 of the BPA Code of Practice outlines that the written authorisation must also set out: A: the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined. B: any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation. C: any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement. who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs. E: the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement. I can see that the operator has provided a copy of the their ‘contract for parking enforcement’ that has been signed by themselves and the landowner in January 2019. This confirmed that the hours of operation are between 08:00 and 18:30. The operator has provided images of the signs on site that are dated September 2022, which confirm the hours of which the tariffs apply are from 08:00 until Midnight. It is clear to see that the terms and conditions of parking have changed since the contract has been agreed with the landowner, due to there being a difference in the operating hours. Therefore, after reviewing the evidence provided by the parking operator, it is clear that the landowner contract does not demonstrate that the operator has the rights to manage the site in question, in the way that they operator are managing it. In this case, the operator has not rebutted the appellants grounds and I cannot determine if the PCN has been issued correctly. As such, I am allowing the appeal. The appellant has raised other grounds in their appeal, but as I am allowing the appeal, it is not necessary for me to address these.