One Parking Solution - Another version of a non-POFA NTK

triple-clones

Just wanted to share this NTK received today from One Parking Solution.

I'm calling it non-POFA, but worse then the other One Parking Solution NTK I have seen on this forum this one is threatening debt recovery costs as well. Interested to hear others thoughts.

Also the period is less then 5 minutes.

Also look at the dates, "Contravention" 2nd Sept, Sent 23rd Oct, received 29th Oct.

Finally the land owner seems to be Portsmouth City Council so I understand it means this land is excluded?

Coupon-mad

triple-clones said:

Just wanted to share this NTK received today from One Parking Solution.

I'm calling it non-POFA, but worse then the other One Parking Solution NTK I have seen on this forum this one is threatening debt recovery costs as well. Interested to hear others thoughts.

Yes that is a new version and certainly non-POFA. I will add it to the NTK pics thread.

As you can see, OPS are now in the IPC not the BPA.  You will likely lose at IAS but could try an appeal as keeper, saying:

- the NTK is non-POFA, and

- the land appears to be under statutory control (Portsmouth City Council) and

- no fair consideration period was allowed.

Then show us the useless IAS decision in the end and COMPLETELY IGNORE IT.

Tell OPS if you move house within 6 years of course because you must check every letter.  You can't ignore a court claim but would win and they are easy to defend.

triple-clones

Appeal lodged with OPS using the template. Interesting their website says they are still BPA

I will write to Portsmouth CC as well and will update this thread on any progress

triple-clones

The sign also shows BPA - hugely confusing for anyone to know who they are members if you ask me.

Almost as confusing the as the unlit sign itself.

KeithP

triple-clones said:

The sign also shows BPA - hugely confusing for anyone to know who they are members if you ask me.

Almost as confusing as the unlit sign itself.

Surely you realise by now that this whole private parking malarky is set up to confuse people?   

Parking companies can only be in one Approved/Accredited Operator Scheme.
However, many IPC Approved Operators are also corporate members of the BPA.
This is pointed out in the opening post of the NEWBIES thread.

Umkomaas

Their transfer from the BPA AOS to the IPC equivalent is a fairly recent occurrence. Changing all their signage to show the IPC roundel would be quite a logistical task, and won't be top of their priority list.  

However the electronic editing of their website should not be so difficult. Dob them in to the BPA, because I'm sure they won't be too pleased to see themselves still linked to a renegade!  Complain about their signage too while you're at it. Give OPS something extra to deal with. 

triple-clones

KeithP said:

triple-clones said:

The sign also shows BPA - hugely confusing for anyone to know who they are members if you ask me.

Almost as confusing as the unlit sign itself.

Surely you realise by now that this whole private parking malarky is set up to confuse people?   

Parking companies can only be in one Approved/Accredited Operator Scheme.
However, many IPC Approved Operators are also corporate members of the BPA.
This is pointed out in the opening post of the NEWBIES thread.

I did read it in the NEWBIE thread, just thought I would highlight as they still showed BPA Approved Operator on the website

triple-clones

Umkomaas said:

Their transfer from the BPA AOS to the IPC equivalent is a fairly recent occurrence. Changing all their signage to show the IPC roundel would be quite a logistical task, and won't be top of their priority list.  

However the electronic editing of their website should not be so difficult. Dob them in to the BPA, because I'm sure they won't be too pleased to see themselves still linked to a renegade!  Complain about their signage too while you're at it. Give OPS something extra to deal with. 

I have just been back and see they have updated their website, although I have a dated screenshot so will send it to BPA all the same.

Regarding updating signs and priorities, I would hope their contact with BPA stipulates a reasonable timeframe to update all signs regardless so will include in my submission.

Thanks

triple-clones

Response from BPA regarding OPS use of logos just for peoples interest:

I can confirm that One Parking Solution was a member of the Approved Operator Scheme until 31/07/2024. They are now a member of the IPC.

There is a transition period in which One Parking Solution can still use the Approved Operator logo on their signage.

If a Parking Charge has been issued after 31/07/2024, the operator will use the IPC logo on their paperwork.

I hope this clarifies your query.

Coupon-mad

The Trade Bodies are fairly useless and certainly don't exist to support consumers.

triple-clones

OPS have replied rejecting the appeal, their response is laughable

It’s important to understand that that parking on private land that is contracted to and managed by One
Parking Solution (OPS) is not a right, its conditional, the (T&C’s) apply to all users of the site and are fully
and clearly displayed on the parking signs (“The Parking Contract”).

Whilst a consideration period is typically afforded to the driver to read the parking T&C’s sign they must
either comply with the T&C’s or remove the vehicle from site, a grace/consideration period is not a free
parking period and will not apply if the driver is making use of the land, in addition choosing to not read
the T&C’s of parking is not considered a mitigating circumstance it’s a choice.

We acknowledge the contents of your appeal however this does not exempt you from the terms and
conditions of the site. As you are unable/unwilling to advise us of the driver’s name, the keeper of the
vehicle becomes liable as it is safe to assume that the keeper would have access to either drive the
vehicle or give your authority to the driver.

On to IAS I guess.