POPLA Decisions

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6015816

Pcn issued fantasy island Skegness - wrong digits entered
Smart parking

Decision - successful


Assessor name - Adele Ditchfield

Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has not provided a copy of the PCN.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant says they purchased a parking ticket, but the first two letters printed are incorrect. The appellant has requested evidence that shows the payment machine was working correctly. The appellant says the operator has not incurred a loss. The appellant has provided evidence of the purchased parking ticket.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The appellant has identified as the driver of the vehicle on the day of the parking event. As such, I am considering the appellant’s liability for the PCN, as the driver. As the operator has not provided a copy of the PCN I am unable to assess if this has been issued correctly. In terms of POPLA appeals, the burden of proof rests with the operator to provide clear evidence of the contravention it alleges occurred, and consequently, that it issued the PCN correctly. Upon consideration of the evidence provided to POPLA, I cannot determine the terms and conditions of the car park were breached. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued incorrectly. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.

Got lucky on this one, appealed mainly on authority to issue but won on signage. Leeson learned, follow the advice before jumping in too soon. Thanks for all the help

DecisionSuccessful

Assessor NameAdele Ditchfield

PPC: NCP

Original post: forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6025542

Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) for not parking correctly within the markings of a bay space.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant says there was no signage on the fence enforcing the terms and conditions. The appellant says they do not believe the operator has authority to issue PCNs on the land. The appellant says the car park was full, so they parked on a grass verge where other vehicles were parked. The appellant says they did not block any other vehicles. The appellant paid to park. The appellant says the operator has not experienced a financial loss. The appellant has provided evidence to support their appeal.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The appellant has identified as the driver of the vehicle on the day of the parking event. As such, I am considering the appellant’s liability for the PCN, as the driver. The operator has provided photographic evidence of signage in the car park that states: “A PCN may be issued for failure to comply with the terms and conditions (which can be found in and around this car park)…this includes the following breaches: failure to park wholly within an authorised parking bay…PCN charges paid within 14 days – £50…PCN charges paid after 14 days - £75”. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the vehicle parked on a grass verge, outside of a marked bay. Part of the appellants appeal is that there was not sufficient signage. The operator has provided some images of signage in the site, however these are close up so I cannot determine where they were positioned. The operator has also not provided a site map for me to determine if there was sufficient signage. In terms of POPLA appeals, the burden of proof rests with the operator to provide clear evidence of the contravention it alleges occurred, and consequently, that it issued the PCN correctly. Upon consideration of the evidence provided to POPLA, I cannot determine the terms and conditions of the car park were breached. As such, I conclude that the PCN has been issued incorrectly. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.

PPC: UKPC

Decision: Successful

Assessor Name: Rebecca Fryer

Assessor summary of operator case:
In this case the operator has not submitted any evidence within the 21 days allowed, to show why it issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to the appellant.

Assessor summary of your case:
I note the appellant has submitted grounds of appeal. However, as the operator has not given evidence within the time frame allowed, I do not need to consider the appellants’ submitted information in order to reach a decision about this appeal.

Assessor supporting rational for decision:
POPLAs remit is to assess whether a PCN has been issued correctly, in accordance with the terms and conditions of parking displayed on the signage at a site. When assessing a charge the burden of proof initially lies with the operator. It must provide evidence of the terms and conditions of the parking site, how the driver was made aware of the specific parking conditions, how the terms of the parking contract were breached, and how the appellant was made aware of the charge. As the operator has not submitted a case file or evidence within the 21 day period allowed, I am unable to assess the validity of the charge. I note the appellant has submitted their reasons of appeal, however I have no need to consider this information. I cannot assess the validity of the charge and therefore I consider it was issued incorrectly and allow this appeal.

7 x PCN's and LBCC's for parking at a NHS Hospital.


PPC: Car Parking Partnership

Decision: Withdrawn (7 seperate POPLA appeals)

Reason: Client Request


No other details provided, thread and POPLA appeal can be viewed here: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6010682