CP Plus response, Pre POPLA decision - Advice needed please!

Plan_Freeze

Hi All,

I received a PCN from CP Plus, appealed based on an overstay at TKmaxx due to dehydration and feeling unwell, but they rejected it.

I then appealed to POPLA on the further grounds below, now CP Plus has replied, and POPLA has asked for my input before making a decision.

I just found this forum yesterday, so did the mistake of appealing as the driver and didn't use the newbies guidance..

Grounds of POPLA appeal:

1. Entrance Signage Non-Compliance

2. Inadequate Terms and Conditions Signage

3. Grace Period Considerations

4. Medical Emergency and Judgement Impairment

 Considering that I have overstayed more than 10mins (the grace period), and can't provide evidence of the medical emergency (this is silly cause who would think about trying to find an evidence when they're unwell!), I still think that the first two points about the entrance and T&Cs signage remain, I went through BPA & IPC single Code of Practice fully and constructed the arguments. I'm planning to reply on all the 4 points, as I can't bring in new grounds now.

 I DONNOT WANT TO PAY THESE ****!

 Could you please give some advise?

I will provide the gounds details below in separate posts with photos...

Plan_Freeze

1. Entrance Signage Non-Compliance

As per BPA & IPC single Code of Practice 3.1.1 and 3.1.2, an entrance sign must clearly display information regarding parking terms and conditions, including payment and restrictions. However, the entrance sign at XXX Retail Park car park does not meet these requirements for the following reasons:

3.1.2 (a): There is no clear indication that terms and conditions apply to parking on the site in a suitably sized font. The use of the phrase "parking controls" on the entrance sign is ambiguous and open to multiple interpretations, which leaves drivers unclear about the actual parking restrictions and terms they are expected to follow.

3.1.2 (b): There is no visible statement regarding whether payment is required, or if free parking is only available for a limited period.

3.1.2 (e): The sign does not specify where payment can be made or whether on-site cash payment is available, which is a key piece of information for drivers.

 Additionally, in breach of Annex A, A.1.1 and A.1.3, the entrance signage does not clarify the parking tariff or payment terms, nor does it include any items from Group 1 of Table A.1. Furthermore, the Group 2 text is much smaller than 50% of the Group 1 text, violating A.2.1. This lack of clear information places drivers in a disadvantageous position. I will attach a photo of the entrance sign for your reference.

CP Plus response:

You claim that the signage is not clear. We can confirm that the signage is displayed in compliance with all relevant laws and regulations – please see images and photographs provided in Section F which support this.

 

My further argument:

I will reiterate my argument as it still stands, they just helped me with providing further recent photos as I used the ones from Google maps. What do you think?

Plan_Freeze

2. Inadequate Terms and Conditions Signage

According to 3.1.3 and 3.1.4, signs displaying the specific terms and conditions, including the parking charge for breaches, must be placed in locations where drivers can read them either when parking or when leaving their vehicle. However, no such signage was visible near the payment machines or along the path to the TKMaxx store I visited.

 To further support this, I will attach photos of the two on-site payment machines showing the absence of any visible parking charge information. Additionally, I will provide an older photo from the same location (obtained online) showing how the parking charge used to be clearly displayed, making it clear that 3.1.3 (j) has been deliberately breached in order to penalise drivers and issue maximum fines of £100. This practice clearly contradicts the fair operation of the car park.

CP Plus response:

We advised that clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the need to pay for any stay exceeding 45 minutes, and it is not possible to access any part of the

premises without passing multiple signs. By parking the vehicle on the site Mr XX entered into a valid contract and agreed to abide by its terms and conditions. The ample signage displayed throughout the site advises the terms and conditions of use. One of the conditions is that this is a pay to park site with a free 45 minute period. The signage advises that a Parking Charge of £100 will be issued when allowing your vehicle to remain on site in excess of the free period without making payment for parking.

 It is the driver’s responsibility to ensure they comply with the terms and conditions of the site. In this case, by allowing the vehicle to remain on site for 25 minutes in excess of the free 45 minute period, without

paying for parking, Mr XX breached those terms and conditions.

My further argument:

Still I will reiterate my argument as it still stands, all the T&Cs signs were away from the payment machines and are behind where I parked on lighting columns. Like seriously, why did they put none of them near any of the 6 payment machine on site?!

Plan_Freeze

3. Grace Period Considerations

In line with Table B.1, the BPA and IPC guidelines require a consideration period of 5 minutes and a grace period of 10 minutes. Based on these allowances, the total overstay should only be considered 10 minutes. Since the parking tariff for up to 1 hour and 45 minutes is only £1, any overstay beyond this amount leads to a charge that can only be seen as punitive, as it does not reflect any genuine loss to the operator. The excessive fine of £100 is disproportionate and does not align with the principles of fairness and transparency as outlined by the Parking Eye vs Beavis case.

CP Plus response:

I assume they copied and pasted a ready-made argument as soon as they saw "Parking Eye vs Beavis case", two pages of waffling - please let me know if you want me to put them here.

My further argument:

Any advice?

4. Medical Emergency and Judgement Impairment

I would also like to highlight that the overstay was due to an unexpected medical issue that occurred while I was shopping at TKMaxx. While in the store, I suddenly felt dizzy and dehydrated, making it unsafe for me to continue immediately. The staff at TKMaxx kindly provided me with water and a seat to rest. You can verify this by contacting the TKMaxx staff who were present at the time.

I left the store a couple of minutes before it closed (at 20:00) and remained in my car for approximately 10 minutes afterward to ensure I was well enough to drive, as confirmed by CCTV footage and the time I left the car park (20:08).

At the time, I did not have a clear sense of time due to my medical condition, which impacted my judgment. However, I now understand that I left just before 20:00 because I know the store’s closing time.

After leaving, I went directly to my hotel to rest, as I reside in XXX but was in XXX for work purposes only.

Considering these extenuating circumstances, including the non-compliance with signage regulations, the grace periods stipulated by the Code of Practice, and the medical issues I faced, I respectfully request that you waive the PCN. I will attach all the supporting photographs and documentation for your review.

CP Plus response:

While we appreciate that Mr XXX was feeling unwell, he could have paid for his parking to extend his stay and avoid incurring a parking charge. Our position remains that we have received no mitigating circumstances or evidence for which we should cancel the Parking Charge. We maintain Mr XXX entered into a valid contract and should pay the valid parking charges as per the signage on the site.

My further argument:

I obviously told them then to check with Tkmaxx staff, but it's been nearly three month now, and I obviously can't provide any tangible evidence. Any advice?

 

I have until Friday to respond to POPLA.
Many thanks for your help.

Gr1pr

Show us your proposed POPLA comments response please 

You should only comment on anything you can use within their evidence pack to assist your appeal, no additional evidence etc , just comments on their response using anything that helps your case and diminishes theirs 

Popla comments should be short and concise, bullet points, nothing like your Popla appeal and nothing like their response 

POPLA comments are limited to 9999 characters, including punctuation. ( Think of it as maybe half of an A4 sheet of paper. )

Plan_Freeze

Thank you Gr1pr. Here is my proposed response, all in 4865 charecters.

My response to CP Plus before POPLA decision:

1. Entrance Signage Non-Compliance
   
   

• CP Plus claims that "clear signs at the entrance of this site and throughout inform drivers of the need to pay," yet they fail to address my specific concerns about the entrance signage’s failure to meet BPA & IPC Code requirements.
  
  
• Non-Compliant Wording: The term “parking controls” on the entrance sign is vague and does not clearly state the necessity for payment or outline parking restrictions. This violates 3.1.2(a), which mandates clear communication of applicable terms.
• Omission of Payment Information: There is no indication on the entrance sign about the need to pay for extended stays or how payment can be made (3.1.2(b) & (e)). The lack of visible information regarding payment locations or options is misleading.
  
  
• Recent photos from CP Plus confirm that signage is still inadequate and not in compliance with BPA/IPC standards. The absence of essential information (Group 1 details per Annex A, A.1.1, A.1.3, and Group 2 details per A.2.1) disadvantages drivers by failing to convey critical terms at the entrance.
  
  

Plan_Freeze

Sorry, for the hard read, not sure why formatting got missed up after posting the comment, I had them all formated similar to the first point with multi-level bullet points! Can seem to be able to edit it now.

Gr1pr

Newbies cannot edit posts, not until your status changes to Forumite 

Still seems overly long to me 

Plan_Freeze

I got the count form POPLA website, less than 50% of the limit.

Coupon-mad

This POPLA appeal will be lost but no worries. Overstay appeals almost never win. I'm just preparing you for the inevitable refusal. You will never pay this PCN.

Remove this because it is wrong:

• Grace Period Observance
  
  
• CP Plus states that grace periods are applied in line with BPA Code of Practice, yet they do not address the cumulative consideration of grace periods for both parking duration and exiting the site.
  
  
• BPA’s guidelines suggest a total consideration period of at least 15 minutes (5 minutes to read terms and 10 minutes for leaving the car park). My alleged overstay of 25 minutes only marginally exceeds this, making the fine disproportionate.
• CP Plus’s suggestion that I should have read the signage before exiting overlooks the absence of clear terms near the payment machines, which left no clear opportunity to check the terms without walking far from where I parked.

Plan_Freeze

Coupon-mad said:

This POPLA appeal will be lost but no worries. Overstay appeals almost never win. I'm just preparing you for the inevitable refusal. You will never pay this PCN.

Remove this because it is wrong:

• Grace Period Observance
  
  
• CP Plus states that grace periods are applied in line with BPA Code of Practice, yet they do not address the cumulative consideration of grace periods for both parking duration and exiting the site.
  
  
• BPA’s guidelines suggest a total consideration period of at least 15 minutes (5 minutes to read terms and 10 minutes for leaving the car park). My alleged overstay of 25 minutes only marginally exceeds this, making the fine disproportionate.
• CP Plus’s suggestion that I should have read the signage before exiting overlooks the absence of clear terms near the payment machines, which left no clear opportunity to check the terms without walking far from where I parked.

I liked that, damaged my hope and rebuilt it in the same sentence! 

I will delete the grace period bits.

But if you're sure that POPLA will refuse it, how come a court case will succeed, considering that I won't have any more grounds? Or there will be no court hearing anyway and the case will be dismissed beforehand?

Regarding points 1 and 2, I still believe that CP Plus haven't followed the BPA & IPC Code fully.. regardless whether POPLA will consider these or not.