Rugby St Cross Hospital - CPP/ParkingEye

Coupon-mad

I'd remove point 4 but the rest is good.

Smelly_Dog

CPP have replied to my POPLA appeal with 66 pages of bumf. I have seven days from today to comment. What next?
Should I redact and post a link here?

Smelly_Dog

Here's a little interesting aside. I had heard that the land and buildings were given with the condition that they only ever be used as a hospital. I've found the original Indenture from 1882 online which states that, "The first condition of the gift is that “the lands shall for ever …. be used for the purposes of the Hospital only”.

Is it a long shot to suggest that Car Parking Companies do not fall under the "purposes of the Hospital only?"

From:  https://www.fsx.org.uk/images/Documents/History/Transcript_of_the_indenture.pdf

Smelly_Dog

Another quick spot. The Letter of Authority issued to CPP by ISS Mediclean Limited (St Cross and University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire) dated 12th June 2018 states that, "Where motorists park in a manner not authorised under the terms and conditions" blah blah blah, "For the avoidance of doubt the Parking Charges shall be £50, reduced to £25 if paid within 14 days."

NOT the £100 discounted to £60 if paid within 14 days that they are asking for.

Relevant?

Gr1pr

Include everything you find in their evidence pack that is a failure or noteworthy, that helps your case, plus add anything that backs up your Popla appeal which is to their detriment, so your Popla comments based on their response pack to your appeal submission 

Note, you cannot add new evidence, so seek to find the chinks in their evidence pack and exploit them 

Coupon-mad

Smelly_Dog said:

CPP have replied to my POPLA appeal with 66 pages of bumf. I have seven days from today to comment. What next?
Should I redact and post a link here?

Nope, just spot the issues like the third post of the NEWBIES thread already tells you. Comments stage is covered there.

Castle

Smelly_Dog said:

Another quick spot. The Letter of Authority issued to CPP by ISS Mediclean Limited (St Cross and University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire) dated 12th June 2018 states that, "Where motorists park in a manner not authorised under the terms and conditions" blah blah blah, "For the avoidance of doubt the Parking Charges shall be £50, reduced to £25 if paid within 14 days."

NOT the £100 discounted to £60 if paid within 14 days that they are asking for.

Relevant?

ISS Mediclean are not the landowner.

Coupon-mad

Smelly_Dog said:

Another quick spot. The Letter of Authority issued to CPP by ISS Mediclean Limited (St Cross and University Hospital Coventry & Warwickshire) dated 12th June 2018 states that, "Where motorists park in a manner not authorised under the terms and conditions" blah blah blah, "For the avoidance of doubt the Parking Charges shall be £50, reduced to £25 if paid within 14 days."

NOT the £100 discounted to £60 if paid within 14 days that they are asking for.

Relevant?

MASSIVELY!

A silver bullet. A winning point. Front & centre of your comments.

Smelly_Dog

Notes on CPP POPLA evidence. Please mark my homework but be gentle with me 

I note the "evidence" provided by Car Parking Partnership (CPP) and would like to make the following observations.

1) PCN never received

The Parking Charge Notice shown on pages 14 and 15 of CPP's evidence was never delivered or received. This is the first I have seen of it. CPP have not provided any evidence that it was ever even posted. I only ever received the PCN Reminder shown on pages 16 and 17 which has no mention of POFA so therefore there is no Keeper Liability. I am prepared to sign an oath to this effect in the presence of a magistrate and/or solicitor. (If required.)

2) Lack of Landowner Authority

a) ISS Mediclean Ltd are NOT the Landowner so CPP have failed to prove that they have Landowner Authority. The burden falls upon the operator to prove ongoing landowner authority on the date of the event, not merely show they had historical authority from an unidentified signatory on a specific date in 2018.

b) The Letter of Written Authority from ISS Mediclean Ltd shown on pages 10 and 11 dated 19th April 2018 but not signed until 12th June 2018 is signed by the "Finance Director" of ISS Mediclean Limited (St Cross and UHCW.) Although CPP have redacted the name of this signatory for some reason a quick search of Companies House shows that ISS Mediclean Ltd never had a Finance Director at this time. In 2018 they had a Chief Financial Officer by the name of Barbara Plucnar Jensen who was appointed on 3rd October 2016 and resigned on 28th February 2019. She was replaced by Chief Financial Officer Bruce Andrew van der Waag on 13th May 2019 who was in turn replaced by the current Chief Financial Officer, Joanne Roberts as of 22nd October 2021. There is no agreement signed by the current Chief Financial Officer or any other current Director of the company. I do not believe that Barbara Plucnar Jensen's (or whoever was the relevant ISS Mediclean Ltd Director in 2018) authority would extend beyond her employment so once again CPP have failed to demonstrate Landowner Authority. Previous POPLA decisions have confirmed that redacted, old contracts and those signed only by another agent (not the landowner and with no evidence of authority flowing from the landowner) are not acceptable as evidence, for the purposes of POPLA.

c) On page 10 (3rd paragraph from the bottom) it clearly states, "Please confirm authorisation as follows:

Where motorists park in a manner not authorised under the terms and conditions of parking as set out in the signage at ISS Mediclean Limited (St Cross and UHCW) subject to the agreed permit criteria and exemptions and in accordance with the aforementioned terms and conditions, "Parking Charges"may be issued (in its own name) on behalf of the Landowner to the motorist. FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT THE PARKING CHARGES SHALL BE £50, REDUCED TO £25 IF PAID WITHIN 14 DAYS."

So even if one were to accept that ISS Mediclean Ltd had the authority to supply CPP with a "Letter of Written Authority" (which they don't as they are "NOT THE LANDOWNER" and also decide that it doesn't matter that the signatory to said letter is  an EX-Director/Employee the terms of the "Letter of Written Authority" clearly state that CPP are only authorised to issue PARKING CHARGES FOR THE SUM OF £50, REDUCED TO £25 IF PAID WITHIN 14 DAYS - NOT the £100 reduced to £60 that they are claiming. CPP have clearly shown that they have NO AUTHORITY to issue a PCN for the amount that they are claiming. Therefore the PCN should be cancelled. 

3) Signage

I am pleased that CPP have provided so many photos of the signs at St Cross Hospital. If nothing else it demonstrates quite clearly that the terms and conditions (in a tiny black font on a white background) are totally illegible in a zoomed in, close up photograph nevermind when placed 10 feet away and the bottom of the sign is 7 feet in the air! My photos demonstrate this far more clearly including a view from a driver's door as they exit a vehicle. My photos also show the faded road markings which CPP have conveniently omitted from their evidence pack.

The photos provided do not show my vehicle next to a sign as requested of CPP nor have they demonstrated the exact sign that showed the terms and conditions that the driver was supposed to have breached. They are a generic sample of multiple signs across the site. CPP have therefore failed to prove which signs were relevant. Their photographs of my vehicle do not show a vehicle in a parking space. They show a vehicle driving along a road which, quite frankly, could be anywhere and certainly cannot meet the threshold of acceptable evidence. Simply put they issue a PCN for alleged breach of contract and then supply as evidence four photographs of a moving vehicle with no parking space or signs in sight!

Crucially, upon visiting the site I discovered that the sign at the main entrance is twisted around by more than 90 degrees from the position shown in CPP's photograph and can only be read by looking back over your shoulder once you have passed it or as you are leaving. 

I trust that I have provided one or more reasons for you to uphold my appeal and look forward to your considerations and decision.

Coupon-mad

Nope.

"Front and Centre" means the winning point is your first point.  Not buried halfway.