MET Parking Services, BP petrol station Stansted Airport

mefistofele

Coupon-mad said:

Rejection as expected. Dead easy to win.  

Here's a POPLA appeal I wrote last week for a friend, based on one by @troublemaker22 - this is all you need to put in and it'll fit in the POPLA appeal box:

POPLA APPEAL:

1.      No keeper liability

I appeal as keeper.  I am not obliged to identify the driver and I decline to do so. Even if (which is not the case) the driver is liable, the operator can only transfer the driver’s liability to the keeper by complying with the strict requirements set out in Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (‘POFA’).

As recognised in the BPA Code of Practice, strict compliance with POFA is required in order to pursue a keeper. Assumption, or partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient even for the BPA, as the CoP states:

"21.2 As long as the strict conditions of Schedule 4 are met, you may claim payment from the keeper or the hirer of the vehicle rather than from the driver. To do this you need to follow the procedures set out in the Schedule…"

POFA paragraph 9.(2) (f) states that a notice to keeper "must ...: warn the keeper that if, at the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to keeper is given—

(i) the amount of the unpaid parking charges … has not been paid in full, and

(ii) the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid."

The PCN does not comply with POFA. That's fatal to their case. Game over.

2.  The operator has failed to demonstrate that its signage was adequate to give rise to a contract with the driver to pay the parking charge.  

3.  The operator has not proved that it owns the land in question or was authorised at the relevant time by the landowner to issue and enforce parking charges.

I reserve the right to expand on these points in light of any arguments or evidence put forward by the operator in response to this appeal. 

Thanks for your help!
But I'm a bit confused...Is this everything I need to write for the appeal to POPLA?

I have read the Newbies thread and there are much more point to mention, moreover I got that the appeal needs to be several pages, long on detail to form a formidable block of text, deliberately so to scare off some PPCs who cannot be bothered to contest. Is that right?

Do I need to submit it as PDF? Or just fill in the POPLA appeal box?

Am I missing something or my case is different? 

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Nope this is just the current advice. All you need.

I can't be bothered to edit the NEWBIES thread because POPLA will end this year anyway.

mefistofele

Popla appeal submitted. Let's see how it will go.
Thanks to everyone!

mefistofele

Update...the appeal has been withdraw by MET...I won it!

Following the email from POPLA:

Dear XX XXXX,

The operator has contacted us and told us that they have withdrawn your appeal.

If you have already paid your parking charge, this is the reason your appeal will have been withdrawn. Unfortunately, you cannot pay your parking charge and appeal, which means that POPLA’s involvement in your appeal has ended. You will not be able to request a refund of the amount paid in order to resubmit your appeal to us.

If you have not paid your parking charge, the operator has reviewed your appeal and chosen to cancel the parking charge. As the operator has withdrawn your appeal, POPLA’s involvement has now ended and you do not need to take any further action.

Kind regards

POPLA Team

MET hasn't tried to reply, just withdraw it...is there any explanation to it?

Anyway, thanks for your help!

Coupon-mad

Yay you won!  They threw in the towel.

patient_dream

mefistofele said:

Update...the appeal has been withdraw by MET...I won it!

Following the email from POPLA:

Dear XX XXXX,

The operator has contacted us and told us that they have withdrawn your appeal.

If you have already paid your parking charge, this is the reason your appeal will have been withdrawn. Unfortunately, you cannot pay your parking charge and appeal, which means that POPLA’s involvement in your appeal has ended. You will not be able to request a refund of the amount paid in order to resubmit your appeal to us.

If you have not paid your parking charge, the operator has reviewed your appeal and chosen to cancel the parking charge. As the operator has withdrawn your appeal, POPLA’s involvement has now ended and you do not need to take any further action.

Kind regards

POPLA Team

MET hasn't tried to reply, just withdraw it...is there any explanation to it?

Anyway, thanks for your help!

These bods only withdraw when they realise their claim is rubbish.
YOU WON ... MET LOST ...... Doubt they will tell you with egg on their face.

Just another BPA Highwayman

WaggleDance76

Hi all

So I'm new here, and have found myself in receipt of one of these delightful MET notices too.

My letter is almost identical, except for one new clause that has been added after the third paragraph of the letter.
Please see the new text below (I've also transcribed it under the image for your convenience) :

"Please be warned that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which this notice is given (i) the amount of the unpaid parking charge specified in this notice has not been paid in full, and (ii) we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver we will have the right to recover from you, so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid. This notice is deemed to have been given to you on the second working day after the date of sending it."

I am no legal eagle, but I think this has been added to make the appeal basis described in this thread no longer usable...

Am I right?

Many thanks in advance for your help and advice!

Fruitcake

WaggleDance76 said:

Hi all

So I'm new here, and have found myself in receipt of one of these delightful MET notices too.

My letter is almost identical, except for one new clause that has been added after the third paragraph of the letter.
Please see the new text below (I've also transcribed it under the image for your convenience) :

"Please be warned that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which this notice is given (i) the amount of the unpaid parking charge specified in this notice has not been paid in full, and (ii) we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver we will have the right to recover from you, so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid. This notice is deemed to have been given to you on the second working day after the date of sending it."

I am no legal eagle, but I think this has been added to make the appeal basis described in this thread no longer usable...

Am I right?

Many thanks in advance for your help and advice!

It depends on the dates and what the rest of the NTK does or doesn't say, and where the alleged event occurred.

If you need assistance, please start your own thread where you will get bespoke advice, but please read the sticky Announcement for NEWBIES first, and compare your NTK with the PoFA wording as well to see if can hold a keeper liable.
In addition, if the alleged event occurred on non-relevant land (you haven't said), then the keeper cannot be held liable no matter what wording is used on the NTK.

WaggleDance76

Hi
Apologies, but I tagged on to this thread because I believe my situation is virtually identical to that of the OPs.

It was the exact same location - "(782) BP Stansted SF Connect, Stansted, CM24 1PY".
The alleged contravention was on the 24th October 2024, with a stay of 53 minutes.

The MET Parking Services "Notice To Keeper" letter I have is identical to that of the OP's, front and back, with exception of the vehicle/date details, and the extra clause I cited.

In other words the only differences are the vehicle details, dates/times, and the extra clause I provided.

Many thanks in advance for your help!

LDast

MET are lying with that PoFA wording. The location is not relevant land.