Biting back with a vengeance

Lynnzer

I've won several PCN appeal lately, mostly ia POPLA and am now taking on another.
I can easily appeal this one based on other things such as the issuer already has details of my blue badge, as confirmed by a previous successfully appealed case. However I'm going at this one from a novel standpoint where I am going to use the Supreme Court's verdict on the Beavis case.
My current ticket is for a hospital where there is no entry sign. I know that point would be sufficient to win the case at POPLA, but I'm not putting it to them that way. My POPLA appeal, when it gets that far, is to be a single point appeal rather than a smattering of points, as we all know that the first accepted appeal point disregards any others and I don't want that to happen in this case.
Instead I'm using the Beavis case summary as follows:

My appeal is based solely on the facts laid out in the case of ParkingEye v Beavis which was adjudicated by the Honourable Law Lords at the Supreme Court,

In particular I point to para 111. of the ruling: “......... while the Code of Practice is not a contractual document, it is in practice binding on the operator since its existence and observance is a condition of his ability to obtain details of the registered keeper from the DVLA. In assessing the fairness of a term, it cannot be right to ignore the regulatory framework which determines how and in what circumstances it may be enforced. “

Prior to Para. 111. I also bring in the Courts considered comments in Para 95: “..........Where a motorist becomes liable by contract for a “sum in the nature of a fee or charge” or in tort for a “sum in the nature of damages”, there is a right under certain conditions to recover it: Schedule 4, paragraph 4. One of those conditions is that the keeper’s details must have been supplied by the Secretary of State in response to an application for the information: ibid, para 11. The Secretary of State’s functions in relation to the provision of this information are performed by the DVLA. Under article 27(1)(e) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/2742), the Secretary of State is empowered to make available particulars in the vehicle register to anyone who “has reasonable cause for wanting the particulars to be made available to him”. Since 2007, the policy of the Secretary of State has been to disclose the information for parking enforcement purposes only to members of an accredited trade association. The criteria for accreditation were stated in Parliament to include the existence of “a clear and enforced code of conduct (for example relating to conduct, parking charge signage, charge levels, appeals procedure, approval of ticket wording and appropriate pursuit of penalties”

It is my submission that the Parking Operator in this case had no right or reasonable cause to obtain my details from the DVLA as it was in breach of the mandatory Code of Practice of the BPA. I base this upon the fact that there was no Entry Sign at the point of entry into the managed area. It has since become known to me that the entry and exit points into the hospital grounds have been changed recently. Where there was a sole point of entry has now become the exit, and of course what was the Exit point is now the Entry.

While the Parking Operaror has moved the ANPR cameras to facilitate the collection of vehicle registration details, they have not moved the entry sign to comply with the BPA Code of Practice, and therefore have failed the obligation placed upon them by reference to the points raised by the Supreme Court.

Coupon-mad

All good as long as you attach timed/dated photo proof of no 'entrance sign'.

knightstyle

I am not an expert but I feel you should not rely on just one point in your defence. 
I recently thought I had a cast iron defence as the contract with the landowner had run out however the judge said that in all probability the contract continued. However I won on my second point which was about the signs.

Johnersh

So nevermind the preceding guff, your defence is really just the final para:

While the Parking Operaror has moved the ANPR cameras to facilitate the collection of vehicle registration details, they have not moved the entry sign to comply with the BPA Code of Practice, and therefore have failed the obligation placed upon them by reference to the points raised by the Supreme Court.

If you're saying there was no sign for you to see on entry (the contractual terms) you're presumably saying there can't be a contract, since the clock starts at that point. The reference to the COP is still an entry sign point however you dress it.

You'll find House of Lords authorities from C19th to support basic contract law points, why overcomplicate it as a COP point?

Coupon-mad

But this is POPLA, not a defence.

@Lynnzer is that you of the famous shopping trolley case?!

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/10/smart-parking-ticket-shopping-trolley.html?m=1

He knows what he's doing at POPLA stage.

  

Lynnzer

Coupon-mad said:

But this is POPLA, not a defence.

@Lynnzer is that you of the famous shopping trolley case?!

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2015/10/smart-parking-ticket-shopping-trolley.html?m=1

He knows what he's doing at POPLA stage.

  

That's me Carol. Still having a go at the system. I really want to get the remarks from the Supreme Court adjudicated on by POPLA and in fact I'm willing to go to court for that "no reasonable cause" direction. I'd love to hit ParkingEye with quotes from their much proclaimed win over Beavis

Coupon-mad

Eek ... I'm not Carol. Shudder!

Umkomaas

Coupon-mad said:

Eek ... I'm not Carol. Shudder!

Oops. Lynnzer getting carried away with a Sole appeal point! 🥴 😵‍💫

Lynnzer

I know the situation regarding contract law. I won a case last week on this sort of PCN where there was no entry sign. In fact I've done at least 3 similar ones for neighbours.
However, I really want to test POPLA and the way they adjudicate this single point appeal.
The fact is that my details were obtained when they had no reasonable cause to have them. I'm betting that the evidence of no entry sign, from the photographs I have, will be presented as the reason for allowing the appeal, even though I don't want that. POPLA will more than likely not want to give any verdict that goes as far as saying that the parking operartor accessed my details unlawfully.
I'm not at all worried whether my appeal, if it gets that far, is rejected. I'd be more than willing for a Civil Court Judge to assess whether the Law Lords were wrong in their verdict.
In any case if a court case did arise, then the No Entry sign would be a good 2nd defence point.

Lynnzer

And hey guys 'n gals, it's nice to touch base with all of you who were a constant part of my life when I was more involved on rhe forums.
One of the reasons I have been off the forum for so long is that my email address that is registered is no longer the one I use and I couldn't access my account. Is there any way I can change my account email address?