Popla Appeal Advice within Grace period.

chuck321

Hi, 

I would love some help with this. I have read the NEWB thread. I should have posted here before the appeal but I recently appealed a Parking Charge Notice from Smart Parking to Popla on the grounds being within the advertised grace period. 

Here is my appeal:

I contend that I, as the keeper, am not liable for the alleged parking charge and
wish to appeal against it on the following grounds of Grace Period: BPA Code of Practice–

non-compliance

The BPA’s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at the
end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start.

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.1) states that:
“If a driver is parking without your permission, or at locations where parking is not
normally permitted they must have the chance to read the terms and
conditions before they enter into the ‘parking contract’ with you. If, having
had that opportunity, they decide not to park but choose to leave the car park, you
must provide them with a reasonable grace period to leave, as they will not be
bound by your parking contract.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.2) states that:
“If the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted, you must allow
the driver a reasonable grace period in addition to the parking event before
enforcement action is taken. In such instances the grace period must be a
minimum of 10 minutes.”

BPA’s Code of Practice (13.4) states that:
“You should allow the driver a reasonable period to leave the private car park
after the parking contract has ended, before you take enforcement action. If the
location is one where parking is normally permitted, the Grace Period at the end
of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.”
The BPA Code of Practice (13.2) and (13.4) clearly state that the Grace Period to
enter and leave the car park should be a minimum of 10 minutes. Whilst (13.2) and
(13.4) do not apply in this case (it should be made clear - a contract was never
entered in to), it is reasonable to suggest that the minimum of 10 minutes grace
period each should apply to (13.1) BPA’s Code of Practice.
Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking Association
(BPA):

“The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the
motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply
with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket.”
“No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but
another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”

It is therefore argued that the car is clearly shown to have left fully within the advertised overrun period. Parking for until 14:20 - car left at 14:25.

And that it is unreasonable that no grace period given at start of the parking considering:

The necessary time needed to find and park in a parking spot.

The time needed to to find a ticket machine and fully read the terms and conditions.

As the option of using a parking app "Go Ring" it is unreasonable to not give customers enough time to:

• Download the app (given low 4g data coverage in the area)
• Read all the terms and conditions of the Go Ring App here: <link>
• Read all the instructions here: <link>
• Read cookie terms and conditions here: <link>
• Set up the account with personal details. 
• Set up the account with financial details.
• Authorise any payment with bank

As the Smart Parking Ltd claim the car entered the car park at 13:12:28 and the ticket was  purchased at 13:20. It is unreasonable for "Smart Parking" to demand the customers do all of the above in under 8 minutes. 

chuck321

They have now responded with this:

We would like to clarify that this Parking Charge Notice was issued for insufficient paid time. The contravention of insufficient paid time is issued when there is no payment or there is an underpayment for the vehicle registration mark. As there was an underpayment for the VRM XXXXX, the PCN was issued correctly for insufficient paid time. We can further confirm the Appellant paid for a total amount of 60 minutes; however the vehicle was parked on site for a total of 72 minutes, therefore over staying a total of 12 minutes. It is the responsibility of the Appellant as a motorist to ensure they purchase a valid ticket for their full, correct vehicle registration mark and for the duration of their stay when using this car park.

Smart Parking Limited would like to clarify that it is up to the motorist to take into consideration their time on site. Sufficient time is taken in to consideration for drivers to enter the car park, read the terms and conditions, and decide whether to purchase a ticket or leave the car park. The terms and conditions of the site clearly state “If you do not accept both sets of terms, we are unable to offer you our parking facilities, and require you to remove your vehicle from the car park immediately or, where the Automated Plate Recognition cameras (ANPR) are in use, within 10 minutes of entry.” Had the Appellant acknowledged the signage in the car park they would have been aware of the terms and conditions of the site.  

The BPA Code of Practice February 2024, states drivers must be given advance notice of all parking charges before they enter into the contract for parking services. There are several signs situated around the car park that advise of the terms and conditions and we can confirm all signage on site is BPA approved. Please be aware all signs are set to a standardised height, regulations and written in clearly and intelligible language; as per the BPA requirements. There is no ambiguous language or jargon on any of the Smart Parking signs at this site. As the Appellant failed to adhere to the terms and conditions clearly advertised on the signage and remained on site for 72 minutes, the parking charge notice has been issued correctly.

The site in question is ANPR operated, every accessible entry and exit point to this car park is managed by either an entry or exit camera which takes an infrared image of the vehicle registration as it passes by, which is why it is important that motorists enter their full, correct registration so this can be calibrated to the images of their vehicle obtained from the ANPR cameras to determine whether the vehicle did in fact pay for adequate or inadequate time. It is important that the Appellant purchases their time on site for their full and correct vehicle registration, covering the full duration of their stay so this can be matched up with the images taken by the ANPR cameras. As the Appellant failed to do this and remained on site for 72 minutes, the parking charge has been issued correctly.   

Smart Parking Ltd can confirm the site went live on the 27/08/2018, therefore the Appellant had sufficient time to become familiar with the new requirements on site. Given the evidence Smart Parking Limited have provided, and it is made apparent that the motorist would have been aware of the signage around the car park. Please note, the BPA Code of Practice January 2020, paragraph 19.2, states as well as the signs you must have telling drivers about the terms and conditions for parking, you must also have a standard form of entrance sign at the entrance to the parking area. It also states in paragraph 19.3, Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site. There are several signs situated around the car park that advise of the terms and conditions and we can confirm all signage on site is BPA approved. Please be aware all signs are set to a standardised height, regulations and written in clearly and intelligible language; as per the BPA requirements.  There is no ambiguous language or jargon on any of the Smart Parking signs at this site.

There are several Smart Parking signs situated around the car park including an entrance sign that advise of the terms and conditions and we can confirm all signage on site is BPA approved. Had the Appellants acknowledged the signage they would have been aware of the circumstances in which a Parking Charge Notice can be issued. It is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure they acknowledge all signage when entering the car park and to adhere to the terms and conditions, as the driver parked in breach of these terms and conditions, the Parking Charge Notice has been issued correctly.

With regard to the amount of the charge, a pre-estimate of loss is no longer a requirement by the BPA as of January 2024.  As per the BPA guidelines (February 2024) the amount must be proportionate and commercially justifiable.  The signage around the car park clearly advises that any motorists parked in breach of the advertised terms and conditions may incur a Parking Charge Notice.  This has always been clearly distinguished by Smart Parking Ltd as a Parking Charge Notice and has never been called or disguised as anything else.  

The charge takes into account the commercial costs incurred in pursuit of a motorist who has breached the advertised Terms and Conditions.  The charges considered are such as,  

•                Staff costs

•                Premises

•                Telephone

•                Letters and postage

•                IT systems and support

•                Depreciation of assets related to the enforcement process.

•                Human Resources

•                General costs associated with the membership to the independent appeals service.

Furthermore, Smart Parking Ltd clearly display the reasons in which a parking charge notice can be issued, stating “Motorists must enter their full, correct vehicle registration when using the payment machine.”, “Parking Tariff applies 24 hours a day, Monday to Sunday, Disabled concessions do not apply and failure to comply with the advertised terms and conditions may result in parking charge notice of £100” Therefore as the terms and conditions were breached and the driver remained on site for 72 minutes, the parking charge was issued correctly.

Overall as the Appellant failed to purchase a valid ticket against their full, correct vehicle registration and duration of stay, this confirms the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly and in accordance to the terms and conditions of the site. It is clearly stated on the signage “Parking Tariff applies 24 hours a day, Monday to Sunday, Full and correct vehicle registration must be entered into the payment machine and failure to comply with the advertised terms and conditions may result in parking charge notice of £100”. This further confirms the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly and in accordance with the advertised terms and conditions.  

The Appellant entered the site at 13:12:00pm and exited the site at 14:25:13pm. The Appellant’s total duration of stay was 72 minutes. As the Appellant failed to purchase a ticket against their full, correct vehicle registration and full duration of stay (please see payments) the Appellant therefore failed to comply with the advertised terms and conditions and this confirms the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly. It is the responsibility as a motorist to ensure that they pay for their full duration of stay and enter their full, correct vehicle registration into the payment machine. It is also the responsibility of the motorist to clearly acknowledge the signage located around the site. As there is no payment made against the Appellants VRM and therefore as per the signage, the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly.  

Within Section 13.3 of the BPA Code of Practice, it states “the Grace Period at the end of the parking period should be a minimum of 10 minutes.” We can confirm the grace period at the site is 10 minutes. Based on the evidence provided, it is apparent that the appellant remained on site for 72 minutes and so has exceeded the minimum of 10 minutes as stated within Section 13.3 of the BPA Code of Practice.  

There are various signs located around the site including entrance signs that states the terms and conditions of the site. The signs do state failure to comply with the advertised terms and conditions will result in a parking charge notice of £100 discounted at £60. The terms and conditions are clearly advertised stating in which circumstances a parking charge notice may be issued. Had the Appellant acknowledged the terms and conditions they would have been aware that a valid ticket needed to be purchased for their full, correct vehicle registration and full duration of stay.

The car park is private land and the owners allow access to the public on condition that they park according to the advertised terms and conditions, the signs warn that non-compliance may result in a parking charge notice. Persons entering the car park are, in effect, agreeing to the terms and conditions and if they park in breach of the terms and conditions the landowner has a right to make a charge. The terms and conditions of the car park are requested by our client and Smart Parking Limited as an agent enforces these.

In the light above and evidence enclosed. Smart Parking Limited have decided to uphold the parking charge notice.  

Parking charge notice and any notes

The Parking Charge Notice was issued to the Appellant due to insufficient paid time. As the Appellant failed to purchase a ticket for their full, correct vehicle registration to cover their full duration of stay the Appellant therefore incurred a Parking Charge Notice correctly.  

Registered keeper details and liability trail

As of the <DATE>, DVLA confirmed that XXXXX was the registered keeper of the vehicle. No driver details were disputed.  

Original representations and notice of rejection.

All representation was made by the Appellant XXXXX to Smart Parking Limited and to POPLA.

The Appellant’s appeal was unsuccessful and rejected by Smart Parking Limited on the 18th October 2024.

Images and Plans

There are 13 signs located around the site that inform motorists of the advertised terms and conditions. The terms and conditions clearly state Parking Tariff Applies, Motorists must enter their full, correct vehicle registration when using the payment system and failure to comply with the advertised terms and conditions will result in parking charge notice of £100 discounted at £60 if paid within 14 days. As the Appellant failed to purchase a ticket against their full, correct vehicle registration and full duration of stay, the Appellant therefore breach the terms and conditions and incurred a Parking Charge Notice correctly, as per the signage. As per BPA code of Practice (February 2024) signage must contain the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450 mm. We would like to confirm that all signage around the car park including the entrance sign are written in clearly and intelligible language as per the BPA requirements. There is no ambiguous language or jargon on any of the Smart Parking signs at this site. All signage is BPA approved.  

 

(Removed by Forum Team)

chuck321

They didn't provide anything else. My questions is - I have 7 days to comment - what should I say if anything?

Coupon-mad

Oh no.  If that's the only point you made in your POPLA Appeal, you've almost certainly grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory.

You should have posted before appealing.

This is wrong (it is very out of date):

"The BPA’s Code of Practice states (13) that there are two grace periods: one at the
end (of a minimum of 10 minutes) and one at the start."

You can't win now.

And yet there were two 100% slam dunk guaranteed winning points that always win v Smart Parking.  Can't see that you used either of them

chuck321

Damn it. I got that from this forum. What were they? I thought I went through everything on the newb thread. 

chuck321

So what now? Just pay up?

fisherjim

Unfortunately I think you are quoting from the wrong version of the BPA COP you are quoting Version 7 where as Version 9 was in force at the time of your event.

13.2 states in V9:

The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not
apply where a parking event takes place.

Yes the scammers plugged that one, so POPLA will reject on that.

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/BPA_AOS_code_of_practice_version_7_January_2018.pdf

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/NEW Redesigned Documents/Version91.2.2024.pdf

Coupon-mad

Haha! Of course not.

Enjoy the debt crawler demands for years.

Such a shame though when there were two 100% guaranteed methods to beat Smart at POPLA which were found with one forum search in all other Smart threads.

chuck321

Yep found them now. <shame>

Coupon-mad

chuck321 said: Yep found them now. <shame>

You live and learn and the good news is, you did get lucky in that this PPC is not litigious at all.  Ignore.

Tell them only if you move house.

chuck321

But what if they do take me to court?