Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 21st Oct 19, 4:21 PM
    • 8Posts
    • 3Thanks
    cersei11
    NPS paid using the wrong App
    • #1
    • 21st Oct 19, 4:21 PM
    NPS paid using the wrong App 21st Oct 19 at 4:21 PM
    Hi I've read through the newbies information and appealed to NPS which was rejected.

    I paid for parking for the correct amount of time but used Ringo by mistake and therefore entered the wrong location code. NPS rejected the appeal saying it is clearly stated which company to use to pay for parking on the side of their machines. I have the text messages and payment history via the Ringo App but at the wrong location. I haven't admitted who the driver was.

    Also I contacted the council who have told me the landowner doesn't own the land where I was parked as there is some dispute over who owns which parts of the car park. A friend won an appeal with NPS when they stated the land was not owned by their client. Should I use both reasons to appeal with POPLA?
Page 1
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 21st Oct 19, 11:29 PM
    • 77,733 Posts
    • 91,257 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #2
    • 21st Oct 19, 11:29 PM
    • #2
    • 21st Oct 19, 11:29 PM
    Yes if this firm you are calling 'NPS' are in the BPA and have offered POPLA, not the IAS. Who are this NPS?

    Have you found the other POPLA point templates in post #3 of the NEWBIES thread?
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 22nd Oct 19, 7:46 AM
    • 8 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    cersei11
    • #3
    • 22nd Oct 19, 7:46 AM
    • #3
    • 22nd Oct 19, 7:46 AM
    Thanks for your reply. Northern Parking Services. I have found a couple of threads relating to them but I'm not sure what grounds to appeal to POPLA with
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 22nd Oct 19, 9:08 AM
    • 15,551 Posts
    • 16,286 Thanks
    The Deep
    • #4
    • 22nd Oct 19, 9:08 AM
    • #4
    • 22nd Oct 19, 9:08 AM
    Nine times out of ten of these tickets are scams so consider complaining to your MP, it can cause the scammer extra work.

    Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

    Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

    Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • MistyZ
    • By MistyZ 22nd Oct 19, 9:37 AM
    • 1,125 Posts
    • 2,292 Thanks
    MistyZ
    • #5
    • 22nd Oct 19, 9:37 AM
    • #5
    • 22nd Oct 19, 9:37 AM
    the landowner doesn't own the land where I was parked
    Originally posted by cersei11
    Maybe light will dawn after another cuppa, but at the moment this sentence is boggling my brain. Surely if the landowner doesn't own the land they're not the landowner? Did the council tell you who the dispute is with i.e. who the other potential landowner is?

    Anyway, 'No Landowner Authority', which is a standard part of almost every POPLA appeal, may throw up some interesting stuff. And may well be the winning point by the sounds of it.

    Signage too .... another standard. Get some good photos of signage (or use Google Streetview for screenshots) and peruse them at your leisure to decide which pics to use to demonstrate just how confusing this place is. Information on the side of the machines ... ? Seems to me that is a very stupid place to put key info. Just how fat are these machines?

    There will be a lot of other points to make .... they're meaningless to most of us until we've read & digested the Newbies' thread advice and perused other POPLA appeals. I guess I read over key advice on here several times before I started drafting my appeal.

    Also ask the council who all the potential landowners are and complain to the lot of 'em.
    Last edited by MistyZ; 22-10-2019 at 9:43 AM.
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 22nd Oct 19, 1:38 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    cersei11
    • #6
    • 22nd Oct 19, 1:38 PM
    • #6
    • 22nd Oct 19, 1:38 PM
    Yes sorry I can see how confusing that sentence was. It should have read the alleged Landowner of the site. Council have said there are no clear boundaries in the car park with various different parties having an interest in the area. A friend appealed and won with NPS citing this information. Wish I'd done the same but I thought they would accept an appeal when payment had actually just been made incorrectly.

    Will read everything again and submit my appeal to POPLA. Thanks for your help and advice
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 22nd Oct 19, 3:19 PM
    • 5,801 Posts
    • 7,451 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #7
    • 22nd Oct 19, 3:19 PM
    • #7
    • 22nd Oct 19, 3:19 PM
    No, read everythnig and show US your POPLA appeal
    You need to make ac lear argument showing that the boundaries are blurred and you cannot tell who is repsonsible for which area of the car park.
    • MistyZ
    • By MistyZ 23rd Oct 19, 10:30 AM
    • 1,125 Posts
    • 2,292 Thanks
    MistyZ
    • #8
    • 23rd Oct 19, 10:30 AM
    • #8
    • 23rd Oct 19, 10:30 AM
    I'm wondering how best to 'show' that the boundaries are blurred. The council must be basing what they say on something or other ... but what?

    If there is a map or some kind of document that shows the confusing situation, it'd be nice to have a copy to embed in your POPLA appeal. You could ring the council again and ask what evidence they are referring to and, if possible, how you can get your hands on it.

    Alternatively, perhaps it's enough or at least better than nothing to state that you have been informed that the boundaries are blurred / disputed by .... (name or position of the person who gave the information, the department they're in, name of council).
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 23rd Oct 19, 1:04 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    cersei11
    • #9
    • 23rd Oct 19, 1:04 PM
    • #9
    • 23rd Oct 19, 1:04 PM
    Thank you all for your help so far. The information was provided by the council but not formally just through a friend but I understand it to be accurate. Would you mind having a look at my draft response please to see if I am along the right track.

    I am the keeper of the above vehicle and have received a demand from Northern Parking Services on xxx. My appeal to NPS was rejected on xxxx 2019 and I have been given POPLA Code xxxx

    The basis of my appeal is on the following grounds
    1. The correct amount of time was paid for and adhered to.
    2. Poor Signage
    3. No evidence of Landowner Authority
    4. The charge is disproportionate and not commercially justifiable


    .
    1. The vehicle xxxx entered the xxx on xxx at xx as evidenced by NPS photographs. Parking was then made at xxx via the cashless system provided by Ringo using registration xxxx and location code xxx and was successful. Ringo services make no provision to print a ticket to display although a text message was received showing payment made. There was reasonable expectation that the payment was made appropriately as this service had been used many times before in car parks in nearby locations. It was only when a PCN arrived that there was a realisation that the wrong app and location code had been used. The attached photograph proves parking was paid for the vehicle but with the wrong details.

    2. The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself

    I note that within the Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA) 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. POFA 2012 defines '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 assessment, as appellant, of the signage in place at the location. 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 - given the minuscule font size of the £100, which is illegible in most photographs and does not appear at all at the entrance - is NOT sufficient to bring the parking charge (i.e. the sum itself) to the attention of the motorist

    The site has few and sparse signs that are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and driving angles. The terms and the sum on the signage are also displayed in a font which is too small to be read from a passing vehicle, and are in such a position that anyone attempting to read the tiny font would be unable to do so easily and is not sufficient to bring the parking charge (i.e. the sum itself) to the attention of the motorist. The Defendant claims this is a breach of the POFA 2012 Shedule 4 and Schedule 18 of the BPA CoP and offers further evidence of distinguishing this case from the Beavis case as;


    3. I do not believe that the person/persons who have employed Northern Parking Services own the land on which I was parked as indicated by the local council. Boundaries within this area are currently in dispute and there is no clear definition of who owns the land on which I was parked. I would therefore request NPS to prove the land on which I was parked is in fact owned by their client.

    In addition I believe there is no contract with any landowner/operator that entitles NPS to levy these charges and therefore it has no authority to issue parking charge notices (PCN’s) This being the case, the burden of proof shifts to NPS to prove otherwise so I require NPS to produce an unredacted copy of their contract with any owner/occupier and that the POPLA adjudicator scrutinises it. Even if a basic contract is produced and mentions PCN’s the lack of ownership or assignment of title or interest in the land reduces any contract to one that exists simply on an agency basis between NPS and the alleged owner/occupier, containing nothing that NPS can lawfully use in their own names as a mere agent, that could impact on a third party customer.

    The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights, and of course all enforcement dates/times/days, and the boundary of the site - is key evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do, and when/where.

    It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is authorised on the material date, to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

    Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed, generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.

    Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in the BPA CoP) and basic but crucial information such as the site boundary and any bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the only restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge, as well as the date that the parking contract began, and when it runs to, or whether it runs in perpetuity, and of course, who the signatories are: name/job title/employer company, and whether they are authorised by the landowner to sign a binding legal agreement.

    Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:

    7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.

    7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:

    a the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined

    b any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation

    c any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement

    d who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs

    e the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement

    4. Whilst quantified costs can be considered on a standard basis, the penalty imposed is wholly disproportionate and does not stand up to scrutiny. The charge is an unenforceable penalty based upon a lack of commercial justification. The Beavis case confirmed that the penalty rule is certainly engaged in any case of a private parking charge and was only disengaged due to the unique circumstances of that case, which do not resemble this claim.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 23rd Oct 19, 1:55 PM
    • 25,573 Posts
    • 41,419 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    It was only when a PCN arrived that there was a realisation that the wrong app and location code had been used. The attached photograph proves parking was paid for the vehicle but with the wrong details.
    That’s enough for POPLA to find that the PCN was issued correctly and your appeal will be dismissed. Don’t hand them your head on a plate. Keep clear of this. But much may depend on what you’ve already said in your initial appeal, the cat may be already out of the bag, but let us see exactly what you said in the initial appeal please.

    Was the NtK (first correspondence from NPS) PoFA compliant? You’ve not alluded to anything related, so please give us the date of the parking incident and the date of issue of the NtK (as shown on the NtK).
    Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case papers, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day;
    show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 23rd Oct 19, 2:05 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    cersei11
    Thank you for your response. The incident happened on 23rd September and notice was received on 27th September. I appealed on 4th October and this was rejected on 14th October.

    In my appeal I said I had paid using the correct amount via Ringo but had entered the wrong location code missing off one digit. I believed even after receiving the PCN notice I had used the right app but wrong code. It was only when I went to check the details after the appeal was rejected I realised it wasn't Ringo but a different company which is shown in very small letters on the side of the machine.
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 23rd Oct 19, 2:41 PM
    • 7,049 Posts
    • 7,329 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    ........very small letters on the side of the machine.
    There's a point right there then! Poor signage.
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 23rd Oct 19, 3:15 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    cersei11
    Thank you I do intend to use poor signage as one of the reasons. Just need to getting the wording right on the 'failure to pay' element as I did pay but just by the wrong method
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 23rd Oct 19, 6:37 PM
    • 25,573 Posts
    • 41,419 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Thank you I do intend to use poor signage as one of the reasons. Just need to getting the wording right on the 'failure to pay' element as I did pay but just by the wrong method
    Originally posted by cersei11
    Your own photos would be very useful, if not essential, to underpin any assertion on poor signage.
    Please note, we are not a legal advice forum. I personally don't get involved in critiquing court case papers, so unable to help on that front. Please don't ask.
    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day;
    show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • MistyZ
    • By MistyZ 23rd Oct 19, 7:21 PM
    • 1,125 Posts
    • 2,292 Thanks
    MistyZ
    First paragraph of section 3 identifies the driver. You may argue that it doesn't, but that one letter pronoun needs to go because to a POPLA assessor, it will.

    Haven't read it all, so go thru' with fine tooth comb in case the same thing happens elsewhere.
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 23rd Oct 19, 7:46 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    cersei11
    Thank you I will amend paragraph in 3. and I have taken photographs. I may also have the plans for the land in question just waiting for my MP to provide a copy.
    • cersei11
    • By cersei11 24th Oct 19, 11:23 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 3 Thanks
    cersei11
    I have now managed to get a copy of the plans from the council. There are boundaries set out and there are three separate interested parties all near each other. I've been advised by the council to appeal on the basis I was parked on council land and unless they have photographic evidence to prove otherwise I should win.

    The photographs on the PCN are entry and exit shots to the car park itself and not of me parked. I've submitted a SAR request to obtain any photographs they may have. Do you think this is the right course of action and should I forget about the fact I pay did any albeit incorrectly or still include this as part of the appeal?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 24th Oct 19, 11:27 PM
    • 77,733 Posts
    • 91,257 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Do you think this is the right course of action and should I forget about the fact I pay did any albeit incorrectly or still include this as part of the appeal?
    Yes I do. Leave out anything about paying with the wrong app.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

776Posts Today

7,350Users online

Martin's Twitter