C.U.P enforcement Watford. How to appeal

Gloglow1

Hi I’ve left this to 11th hour having forgotten about it unwittingly. If anyone is online and can help it would be really a big help to not let this ridiculous company continue to try to charge an extreme price! (Saw previous message in same area) 

I did briefly stop the car here for a few minutes (we just left Sainsbury’s car park and I had little one to attend to before joining ring road) but £100 is totally a joke for this brief stop. I never left the car, engine was on whole time. Also in my defence, despite the 4 signs, I didn’t notice them as I had to stop urgently and left as soon as I could. 

The letter went to hire car company who have provided a template to send on to C.U.P to name us as the nominated person of car with our address etc on it. 

I want to relieve hire company of course - but is that the same as taking ownership as named driver in this case? 

Is there a template that would work for me? I strongly don’t want to pay, definitely not £100 as I’ve missed reduced amount. 

Happy to take any guidance including wording of ?appeal. 

Gr1pr

Study the advice given by Edna Basher at the bottom of the first post in the newbies sticky thread in announcements near the top of the forum,  seeing as its a hire vehicle 

Gloglow1

thank you Gr1pr, I have looked again and think I have made a better sense of it this time. 

Will this wording be ok? 

Dear Sir/Madam

Re: PCN No.

I challenge this 'PCN' as lessee of the car and subsequently request all future correspondence be sent directly to myself at the address listed below:

My street

My Town

My Postcode

I am the vehicle's hirer and keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definitions under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) now it is proven that in this instance, the registered keeper is not the "keeper" (as defined under POFA), Civil Enforcement has no reason to contact ——- again regarding this PCN

 I would like you to know I (as the registered keeper of the vehicle) am not ignoring your letter suggesting my liability for a charge related to a parking infraction that you state took place on ——— at ————.

I wish to outline my current position in reference to your PCN.

-I was NOT the driver of the vehicle.

- I am not obliged to disclose the identity of the driver and this does not affect my liability in this matter .

- You will need to pursue this claim with the driver once you identify them.

I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers. These signs (from a seated position in the vehicle as it enters the ‘car park’ is impossible to read and any specific rules regarding stopping on yellow lines being strictly prohibited at any time.

Further, I understand you do not own the ‘car park’ and you have given me no information about your policy with the landowner or on site businesses, to cancel such a charge. So please supply that policy as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

Further Questions

1. Who is the party that contracted with C.U.P Enforcement for the provision of their services at the site of the alleged to have taken place in ————?

2. What is the full legal identity of the landowner?

3. As you are not the landowner, please provide a contemporaneous and unredacted copy of your contract with the landholder that demonstrate that C.U.P Enforcement have the authority of the landowner to both issue parking charges and legislate in your own name or on behalf of the landowner .

4. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? - Yes or no?

5. If the charge is based on damages for breach of contract, please provide justification of this sum.

6. Is your charge based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking? - Yes or no?

7. If the charge is based on a contractually agreed sum for the provision of parking please, provide a valid VAT invoice as you make no mention on VAT in any correspondence.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either offer me a POPLA code or cancel the charge.

Thank you for your cooperation and I look forward to receiving your response within the relevant timescales specified under the British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice.

Yours faithfully,

My name

Gloglow1

Sadly my partner (who’s named on the lease) isn’t on board with appeal so it will be double the effort to have correspondence in their name on debt letters, court letters etc …. 

Does anyone know much about this company? Maybe even who the landowner is for this space in Watford, and, if this is tied to Watford council as it’s relying on road markings? 

It’s v.likely no one would park their car / leave it for a lengthy time - that’s clear from the council’s double yellow lines- but to charge unsuspecting motorists for a brief stop is totally shocking and annoying to follow up!! 

Gr1pr

Its got nothing to do with the council 

It will be private land overseen by the parking company C.U.P , a BPA AOS member 

Sadly,  receiving a PCN for a brief stop on private property is a common occurrence 

Umkomaas

Sadly my partner (who’s named on the lease) isn’t on board with appeal so it will be double the effort to have correspondence in their name on debt letters, court letters etc …. 

You deal with on their behalf in terms of the admin side of things. Everything must be in their name though. So, just appeal it as hirer, get the inevitable rejection (with POPLA verification code), and as CUP have not included any copies of the hire agreement etc (as required by PoFA), this is a nailed on win for your partner at POPLA. 

fisherjim

The double yellow lines are on the road that belongs to the council, this is not relying on road markings, or anything to do with the council,  if you had stopped on the DYLs instead of the private pull in you wouldn't have a PCN.

This is a honeytrap for the greedy PPC and has cropped up here twice recently, basically there is no offer to park so no offer of a contract they cannot charge you for a service they are not offering under contract law, a private company cannot issue fines!

You should follow the advice on here and don't consider paying these idiots, they have no intention of stopping people doing this they want you to do it, it's how they make money.

Coupon-mad

Gloglow1 said:

Sadly my partner (who’s named on the lease) isn’t on board with appeal so it will be double the effort to have correspondence in their name on debt letters, court letters etc …. 

But none of that will happen because a hirer appeal where the driver hasn't been named / implied, CANNOT LOSE at POPLA appeal stage.

The hirer uses the Edna_basher appeal and don't add extra stuff.  This bit makes no sense:

"(as the registered keeper of the vehicle)"

Gloglow1

Many thanks for all your quick replies and help with appeal. Really appreciate the feedback.  Fingers crossed (will update with hopefully favourable outcome). 

Le_Kirk

You say you have received a template from CUP but have you/your partner received a Notice to Hirer in either of your names?

Gloglow1

Hi I received this reply, looks like I’ll need to try POPLA. What sort of details for appeal should I give?