POPLA appeal review please

received decision today

Decision Successful
Assessor Name Carly Law

[just posting the important bit]

I must consider whether the signage at this site is sufficient.

When doing so, I must first consider the minimum standards set out in Section 18 of the BPA Code of Practice. Within Section 18.1 of the BPA Code of Practice, it states as follows: “You must use signs to make it easy for them to find out what your terms and conditions are.”
Furthermore, Section 18.3 of the BPA Code of Practice states: “You must place signs containing 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.

Keep a record of where all the signs are. Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand.”

As stated, these are the minimum standards that a parking operator must meet when informing motorists of the terms and conditions at a particular site
In addition to this, I note that within the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 it discusses the clarity that needs to be provided to make a motorist aware of the parking charge.

Specifically, it requires that the driver is given “adequate notice” of the charge.

The Act then moved on to define “adequate notice” as follows: (3) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2) “adequate notice” means notice given by: (a) the display of one or more notices in accordance with any applicable requirements prescribed in regulations under paragraph 12 for, or for purposes including, the purposes of sub-paragraph (2); or (b) where no such requirements apply, the display of one or more notices which: (i) specify the sum as the charge for unauthorised parking; and (ii) are adequate to bring the charge to the notice of drivers who park vehicles on the relevant land.

Even in circumstances where PoFA 2012 does not apply, I believe this to be a reasonable standard to use when making my own independent assessment of the signage in place at the location.
The operator has provided images of the signage at the site.

The charge amount is not prominent on the signage, due to the size and colour of the font. There is other information on the signage in a bold font and I would expect the charge amount to also be prominent.

Having considered the signage in place at this particular site against the requirements of Section 18 of the BPA Code of Practice and PoFA 2012, I am of the view that the signage at the site is not sufficient to bring the parking charge to the attention of the motorist. As such, I can only conclude that the PCN has been issued incorrectly. As I am allowing the appeal on this basis, I do not need to consider any other grounds of appeal raised by the appellant.
[END]

I have seen ECP appeals lose although I think they use the same signage as at this site.
I must have had better assessor in the lucky dip of appeals

Or maybe it was my photos showing no visible signage at a specific parking area at this retail park.


thanks for he help on this forum.
Hope Coupon-Mad is back soon:eek:


:j

nosferatu1001
would this be an email to Steve Clarke himself or info @britishparking.co.uk

email sent to Steve.c