PPS private parking solutions - PCN issued whilst passengers in the car

Rickerdoom

Hi everyone,

I've received a PCN stating that "obstructive parking is a contravention at the site." However, the car was never actually parked - passengers were still inside, waiting for a disabled family member.

The warden took photos from a long distance and is claiming the car was parked, but if they had taken closer photos, it would have been clear that there were people inside the vehicle.

I already submitted an appeal using the blue template, which was rejected, and I've now been issued a POPLA code.

Is it worth taking this to POPLA on the grounds that the images don't show the full situation (i.e the car was occupied and not parked)?

Coupon-mad

Show us the PCN and their distance photos.

We need to know how many minutes they captured the car for?

Car1980

Who was obstructed? I'm guessing nobody. Ergo, it can't have been obstructive, parked or otherwise.

fisherjim

Rickerdoom said:

The warden took photos from a long distance and is claiming the car was parked, but if they had taken closer photos, it would have been clear that there were people inside the vehicle.

I already submitted an appeal using the blue template, which was rejected, and I've now been issued a POPLA code.

Is it worth taking this to POPLA on the grounds that the images don't show the full situation (i.e the car was occupied and not parked)?

The car WAS parked whether there were passengers sitting in it or not, that won't wash with POPLA, it would be more reliant on how long it was parked.

The POPLA appeal is not about what happened they don't accept mitigation, they will only consider, signage, the law, process, contracts etc.

Answer the two questions above for better help.

Coupon-mad

You can argue on appeal to POPLA that one minute is insufficient to enter into a contract. 

Coupon-mad

It's not a 'grace period'.

Rickerdoom

Thank you @Coupon-mad

I will change it to: 
"Operators must allow a minimum period of 5 minutes for motorists to consider the terms and conditions before they can be deemed to have entered into a contract."

Is there anything else you think I can add to strenghten my case?

Coupon-mad

Yes of course you need to add more.

You seem to have missed the other usual POPLA appeal points in post 3 of the NEWBIES thread.

Rickerdoom

Coupon-mad said:

It's not a 'grace period'.

I was reading through and realised this user called it grace period too: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/73797736#Comment_73797736

Rickerdoom

Thanks @Coupon-mad I've read through it now. The reason I was only going with the lack of time to enter contract argument is because i read on other threads that it's now best to not include unnecessary information on POPLA appeals and only go with the main argument.   

This appeal is submitted in relation to the ‘Parking Charge Notice’ (PCN) dated ____ issued by Private Parking Solutions (London) Limited (‘PPS’) for vehicle registration number ____.

As registered keeper of the above vehicle, I wrote to PPS challenging the PCN. PPS responded on ____ stating that the appeal had been unsuccessful.

For the avoidance of doubt, the driver’s identity has not been provided and this appeal remains purely from myself as the registered keeper.

The appeal is made on the following grounds, full details of which are provided below:

1.      No Contract Formed Due to Insufficient time Period to form contract

2.      Signs in this car park are not prominent

3.      No evidence of landowner authority

for 2 & 3 I will copy the info linked in post 3 as you mentioned. Is it good to go? 

Coupon-mad

Yep give it a go. Ignore if you 'lose'.