UPDATE - MET PARKING - POPLA APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL

Coupon-mad

Of course you never pay.

speedybuzz2

UPDATE ~ After logging my appeal to POPLA, this is MET Parking’s response. I have 7 days to comment on it further until POPLA make their decision:


In the appeal to POPLA Mr Berry raises the following grounds for appeal: • Driver not identified, no keeper liability We are confident that we have complied with the relevant requirements of PoFA 2012. Please see our compliant Notice to Keeper in Section B of our evidence pack. Please also see a full explanation of why we may pursue the registered keeper under Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012 in Section C of our evidence pack. • The site boundary is not clear The free 60-minute parking period is only available to motorists whilst they are a customer of Southgate Park (Starbucks). At the time the vehicle was on site Starbucks was closed and therefore the driver was not a customer. As such, they were not entitled to the free parking period and payment was required for their stay. We would point out that this car park does not service the McDonald’s restaurant and therefore motorists that park here to visit McDonald’s are not entitled to the free parking period, even when Starbucks is open. We are confident that there are sufficient signs in place in this car park and that the signs are prominently displayed and clearly state the terms and conditions. As demonstrated by the photographic evidence in Section E of our evidence pack Southgate Park has entrance signs either side of the vehicle entrance to the park, therefore there is clear demarcation. Section E also contains copies of the signs, a site map showing their location, and photographs of the signs in situ. The signage specifically states that McDonald’s is not part of Southgate Park. For the avoidance of doubt, we have included an overview of the location with McDonald’s and the access road outlined. We would also point out that the signs in the McDonald’s car park are red and clearly state that the car park is for the use of McDonald’s customers while they are on those premises only. They are entirely different to the blue and white signs shown in Section E of our evidence pack. Ultimately, it remains the driver’s responsibility to check the signs where they park and comply with the stated terms and conditions. We are confident that our signage complies with all relevant legislation and regulations. • No evidence of landowner authority We have included a copy of our contract with the landowner in Section E of our evidence pack. We have redacted commercially sensitive details and highlighted relevant clauses for ease of reading. Our contract with the landowner grants us authority to form contracts with motorists and issue parking charge notices for contractual breach. We refer you to the Supreme Court ruling on ParkingEye v Beavis for the judges’ determination on whether a parking operator is acting as an agent or principal. The ruling may be found at https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0280-judgment.pdf.darl The terms and conditions of parking are clearly stated on the signs that are prominently displayed at the entrance to and around the car park. These include that there is a 60-minute free stay for Southgate Park customers and tariffs apply thereafter. Please note: as the parking event occurred while the on-site businesses were closed, there is no free stay. Should the driver have wished to use the car park while the business is closed, they should have paid the appropriate tariff. As the evidence we have provided in Section E of our evidence pack demonstrates, the vehicle remained in the car park without payment made for this vehicle. It remains the driver’s responsibility to check the signs where they park and comply with the stated terms and conditions. Therefore, we believe that the charge notice was issued correctly, and the appeal should be refused.  

LDast

Simply point out to the POPLA assessor in your response that the operator is under the misapprehension that the land they are operating on is "relevant land". It is not. The land is within the boundary of Stansted Airport and is under statutory control - Airport bylaws - and therefore is NOT "relevant land" as defined in PoFA, Schedule 4, paragraph 3.

To prove the point, you can include a copy of the plan below which has been taken from the London Stansted Terminal Extension Design and Access Statement (July 2023) which shows the airports boundary:

Coupon-mad

You can only add pictures if you reply to POPLA  by email instead of on the portal.

ColinRiche

Coupon-mad said:

You can only add pictures if you reply to POPLA  by email instead of on the portal.

Direct them to that government website and provide the link to that document.
If they don't look at the document more fool them.

Coupon-mad

POPLA won't look at links.

ColinRiche

Coupon-mad said:

POPLA won't look at links.

I don't see an email for popla except one on their FAQs page for late appeals.
The contact us form does not allow attachments.

Coupon-mad

No but the OP has POPLA's email. Everyone does who lodges a POPLA appeal online.

ColinRiche

Coupon-mad said:

No but the OP has POPLA's email. Everyone does who lodges a POPLA appeal online.

I don't see any email address in my POPLA appeals.
In the portal or in the emails they send.
And those are sent from a noreply@ address.

Coupon-mad

You aren't the OP, are you?