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
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 6th Dec 17, 8:22 PM
    • 22Posts
    • 23Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    POPLA unsuccessful
    • #1
    • 6th Dec 17, 8:22 PM
    POPLA unsuccessful 6th Dec 17 at 8:22 PM
    Hello,
    My POPLA descision was unsuccessful.

    The real reason I couldn't pay for my ticket was because the machines I tried wouldn't take my card, had no cash on me and no phone to call the number. I didn't use this reason I used the information on this site when contesting it.

    Popla descision was made 21 days after my appeal but it says I can appeal this to the ombudsman. Is that the next step or shall I just wait and go to court?
    My other worry is I am potentially taking a job abroad at the end of next year, what would happen if I get a summons after leaving the country?

    Also parking eye didn't even submit any information.

    Here is there response:

    DecisionUnsuccessful
    Assessor Name
    Assessor summary of operator case
    The operator!!!8217;s case is that the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session.

    Assessor summary of your case
    The appellant!!!8217;s case is that the operator has not complied with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012). The appellant advises that the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. He states that a contract was not entered into between the operator and the motorist. The appellant has also disputed the operator!!!8217;s authority to issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs) on the land.

    Assessor supporting rational for decision
    The terms and conditions of the site state: !!!8220;Parking Tariffs Apply. Up to 3 hours!!!8230;16.00. Failure to comply with the terms & conditions will result in a Parking Charge of: 100!!!8221;. The operator has issued the PCN as the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session. Images from the operator!!!8217;s Automatic Number Plate Recognition system have been provided, which show that the appellant!!!8217;s vehicle entered the car park at 13:32 and exited at 15:34 on the day in question, staying for a total of two hours and one minutes. A copy of its whitelist payment lookup has also been provided, showing that the motorist did not make a payment to park at the site that day. The appellant!!!8217;s case is that the operator has not complied with PoFA 2012. The appellant advises that the operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. He states that a contract was not entered into between the operator and the motorist. When parking on private land, the motorist forms a contract with the operator by remaining on the land for a reasonable period. The signage at the site sets out the terms and conditions of this contract. Therefore upon entry to the car park, it is the duty of the motorist to review and comply with the terms and conditions when deciding to park. In this case, it is not clear who the driver of the vehicle in question is, so I must consider the provisions of PoFA 2012 as the operator has issued the PCN to the keeper of the vehicle. The operator has provided a copy of the notice to keeper sent to the appellant. I have reviewed the notice to keeper against the relevant sections of the PoFA 2012 and I am satisfied that it is compliant, and that the operator has successfully transferred liability and is able to pursue the keeper of the vehicle. The appellant has disputed the operator!!!8217;s authority to issue PCNs on the land. Section 7.1 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice outlines to operators, !!!8220;If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you the authority to carry out all the aspects of car park management for the site that you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges!!!8221;. The operator has provided a copy of its supply agreement with the landowner. Upon review of this, I am satisfied that the operator has sufficient authority to issue PCNs on the land in line with the British Parking Association Code of Practice!!!8217;s requirements. Ultimately, it is a motorist!!!8217;s responsibility to ensure they comply with the terms and conditions of a site when parking on it. As the motorist did not make a payment for their parking session, they have failed to adhere to the site!!!8217;s terms and conditions. As such, I conclude that the PCN was issued correctly. Accordingly, I must refuse this appeal.
Page 1
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 6th Dec 17, 8:57 PM
    • 18,044 Posts
    • 28,578 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #2
    • 6th Dec 17, 8:57 PM
    • #2
    • 6th Dec 17, 8:57 PM
    Did you give us the early stage details of this PCN? I can find one previous thread for Euro Car Parks, but not ParkingEye.

    You argued to POPLA that the NtK was not PoFA compliant. Why was it not compliant?

    Are you also saying that PE did not provide you with their evidence pack, once you submitted your POPLA appeal, for you to rebut?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    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.
    • Ryandavis1959
    • By Ryandavis1959 6th Dec 17, 9:02 PM
    • 211 Posts
    • 53 Thanks
    Ryandavis1959
    • #3
    • 6th Dec 17, 9:02 PM
    • #3
    • 6th Dec 17, 9:02 PM
    As you admitted that you were the driver in post 1, why did you appeal to POPLA saying that you wasn!!!8217;t the driver? Maybe POPLA smelled a rat and decided to find any old excuse to rule against you?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 6th Dec 17, 9:16 PM
    • 18,044 Posts
    • 28,578 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #4
    • 6th Dec 17, 9:16 PM
    • #4
    • 6th Dec 17, 9:16 PM
    As you admitted that you were the driver in post 1, why did you appeal to POPLA saying that you wasn!!!8217;t the driver? Maybe POPLA smelled a rat and decided to find any old excuse to rule against you?
    Originally posted by Ryandavis1959
    POPLA can no more assume who the driver was than can the PPC. That!!!8217;s why PoFA provides for the keeper to be pursued in the absence of the driver!!!8217;s details. They can!!!8217;t have two bites of the cherry. Surely you realise there is absolutely no legal obligation on the driver to !!!8216;out!!!8217; him/herself, or for the keeper, even if known, for them to provide the driver!!!8217;s details. Otherwise PoFA would have included that obligation.

    No driver details provided - go down the PoFA route. Can!!!8217;t comply with PoFA requirements, then no Keeper Liability. Go whistle.

    So from which element of the laws of the land are you suggesting POPLA has the legal capacity to judge/assume who was driving? Elliott v Loake and CPS v AJH Films have regularly hit the dirt when PPCs have desperately tried to hoodwink the judges using them to argue who the driver was/might have been.

    So which side precisely are you on? A bit of honesty?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    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.
    • claxtome
    • By claxtome 6th Dec 17, 9:37 PM
    • 577 Posts
    • 680 Thanks
    claxtome
    • #5
    • 6th Dec 17, 9:37 PM
    • #5
    • 6th Dec 17, 9:37 PM
    Suggest you edit your opening post to use the wording 'driver of the vehicle' as some PPCs search this forum's posts and use as evidence.
    Last edited by claxtome; 19-01-2018 at 1:15 AM.
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 6th Dec 17, 10:11 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    • #6
    • 6th Dec 17, 10:11 PM
    • #6
    • 6th Dec 17, 10:11 PM
    No eurocarparks was a seperate case which I won.
    In the eurocarparks case I did say I was the driver. In this case I did not mention myself as the driver.

    I can't find my posts regarding PE but yes I am saying PE provided no evidence to POPLA. It even says on POPLA no evidence submitted.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 6th Dec 17, 10:27 PM
    • 18,044 Posts
    • 28,578 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    • #7
    • 6th Dec 17, 10:27 PM
    • #7
    • 6th Dec 17, 10:27 PM
    I am saying PE provided no evidence to POPLA. It even says on POPLA no evidence submitted.
    If that!!!8217;s the case, how come POPLA were quoting from their signage, their NtK and the landowner!!!8217;s authority.

    If you didn!!!8217;t receive PE!!!8217;s evidence pack (check your email spam folder), I would complain to John Gallagher, POPLA Lead Adjudicator to tell him that due process wasn!!!8217;t followed, PE provided you with no evidence pack for you to understand and comment on their case.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    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.
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 13th Dec 17, 10:48 AM
    • 22 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    • #8
    • 13th Dec 17, 10:48 AM
    • #8
    • 13th Dec 17, 10:48 AM
    Ok I contacted POPLA via there enquiries email address, I could not find how to contact John Gallagher directly.
    They have said that as the decision has been made they can't change it.
    PE provided no evidence or it wasn't uploaded by POPLA. I have checked all of my emails, spam/junk everything but didn't receive any other email only the email that said a decision had been made.
    I have been waiting for ages for them to get back to me and am very disappointed in the way this has been handled.
    I guess the next stage is to complain to the ombudsman on the way this has been handled?
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 13th Dec 17, 11:45 AM
    • 2,765 Posts
    • 3,443 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #9
    • 13th Dec 17, 11:45 AM
    • #9
    • 13th Dec 17, 11:45 AM
    What ombudsmen?

    No, you complain again, FAO John Gallagher
    Clear procedural error. You were not given an opporutnity to comment on the operators evidence, through fault of OPLA.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 13th Dec 17, 2:32 PM
    • 58,576 Posts
    • 72,085 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You should have had an email from POPLA a while back, telling you the operator's evidence was available for viewing (they do not have to provide a case summary, which is like it sounds, an optional 'summary').

    PE provide 40 - 50 pages of 'evidence pack' normally, and when you got the POPLA email giving you seven days to comment on the evidence, you should have been able to see that linked on the portal when you logged into POPLA (again, never mind the case summary, forget that). Edna Basher describes the process here:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=73561308#post73561308


    Are you saying that no evidence pack was visible at all? If so, that's your complaint, don't talk about lack of case summary.

    Finally, why did your appeal talk about no keeper liability? Only relevant if it was a Golden Ticket (non POFA version).
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 13-12-2017 at 7:06 PM.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 18th Jan 18, 10:32 AM
    • 22 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    Ok further update regarding my parking charge.

    I attempted to contact POPLA twice regarding my case but the they haven!!!8217;t responded or acknowledged my emails.

    I have now received a letter from parkingeye.
    It!!!8217;s a letter before county court claim.
    It states they are aware my appeal to popla has been unsuccessful and have 28 dats to pay 100 or will be taken to court.
    Do I continue to fight or just pay the charge?
    Last edited by AIMINGHIGH123; 18-01-2018 at 11:03 AM.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 18th Jan 18, 11:22 AM
    • 35,933 Posts
    • 20,202 Thanks
    Quentin
    The newbies faq thread (#2) advises on how to deal with a lbcca.


    (No-one here will advise you to pay!!)
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 18th Jan 18, 11:27 AM
    • 22 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    After posting I have spent the last hour reading through the newbies.

    I feel a bit out of my depth but will give it a go.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 18th Jan 18, 11:28 AM
    • 2,765 Posts
    • 3,443 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    email back to the enforcement@ address
    State you are disputing the result with POPLA...

    Then chase them up.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 19th Jan 18, 1:06 AM
    • 58,576 Posts
    • 72,085 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Just search the forum for the stage you are at, in this case: ParkingEye LBCCC
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 19th Jan 18, 12:41 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    Ok I have emailed POPLA to chase them up. It has been well over a month since my first email to them.

    In the meantime I have looked through the information on this site.
    I!!!8217;m not really sure what I!!!8217;m doing but should I send PE something like this.

    Dear Sirs,

    I am in receipt of your Letter Before Court Claim.
    Your letter contains insufficient detail of the claim and fails to provide copies of evidence your client places reliance upon.

    You must know that on 01 October 2017 a new protocol is applicable to debt claims. Since proceedings have not yet been issued, the new protocol clearly applies and must be complied with.

    Your letter lacks specificity and breaches both the requirements of the previously applicable Practice Direction - Pre-Action Conduct (paragraphs 6(a) and 6(c)) and the new Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (paragraphs 3.1(a)-(d), 5.1 and 5.2. Please treat this letter as a formal request for all of the documents / information that the protocol now requires your client to provide. You must not issue proceedings without complying with that protocol. I reserve the right to draw any failure of the Claimant to comply with the protocol to the attention of the court and to ask the court to stay the claim and order you to comply with its pre-action obligations, and when costs come to be considered.

    Your solicitors must be familiar with the requirements of both the Practice Direction applicable pre-1 October and the Protocol which applies thereafter. You must know, the Practice Direction and Protocol bind all potential litigants, whatever the size or type of the claim. Its express purpose is to assist parties in understanding the claim and their respective positions in relation to it, to enable parties to take stock of their positions and to negotiate a settlement, or at least narrow the issues, without incurring the costs of court proceedings or using up valuable court time.

    I require the following information/documents:

    1. an explanation of the cause of action
    2. whether they are pursuing me as driver or keeper
    3. whether they are relying on the provisions of Schedule 4 of POFA 2012
    4. what the details of the claim are; where it is claimed the vehicle was parked, for how long, how the monies being claimed arose and have been calculated
    5. Is the claim for a contractual breach? If so, what is the date of the agreement? The names of the parties to it and provide to me a copy of that contract.
    6. Is the claim for trespass? If so, provide details.
    7. Provide me a copy of the contract with the landowner under which they assert authority to bring the claim, as required by the IPC code of practice section B, clause 1.1 !!!8220;establishing yourself as the creditor!!!8221;
    8. a plan showing where any signs were displayed
    9. details of the signs displayed (size of sign, size of font, height at which displayed)
    10. Provide details of the original charge, and detail any interest and administrative or other charges added
    11. Provide a copy of the Information Sheet and the Reply Form


    If you do not provide me with this information then I put you on notice that I will be relying on the cases of Webb Resolutions Ltd v Waller Needham & Green [2012] EWHC 3529 (Ch), Daejan Investments Limited v The Park West Club Limited (Part 20) !!!8211; Buxton Associates [2003] EWHC 2872, Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Limited & Peter Dann Limited [2007] EWHC 855 in asking the court to impose sanctions on your client and to order a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to paragraphs 13 ,15(b) and (c) and 16 of the Practice Direction, as referred to in paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol.

    Until you have complied with its obligations and provided this information, I am unable to respond properly to the alleged claim and to consider my position in relation to it, and it is entirely premature (and a waste of costs and court time) for you to issue proceedings. Should you do so, then I will seek an immediate stay pursuant to paragraph 15(b) of the Practice Direction and an order that this information is provided.


    Yours faithfully
    • Half_way
    • By Half_way 19th Jan 18, 12:53 PM
    • 4,166 Posts
    • 5,915 Thanks
    Half_way
    Why haven't you made contact with the landowner?
    From the Plain Language Commission:

    "The BPA has surely become one of the most socially dangerous organisations in the UK"
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 19th Jan 18, 1:50 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    I spoke with hotel at the time when I couldn!!!8217;t pay and they said there had been problems with the machine and not to worry.
    Called them when I first got a PCN and they basically said it!!!8217;s not there problem and they don!!!8217;t have any management over the car park.
    Is that not the case then?
    • DoaM
    • By DoaM 19th Jan 18, 1:54 PM
    • 4,399 Posts
    • 4,434 Thanks
    DoaM
    Unless PE lease the car park from the hotel (VERY unlikely) then PE are merely agents working for the principle (the hotel). As such the hotel can DEMAND the PE cancel the PCN ... your problem will be in getting past reception and speaking with the hotel manager to make him/her see that the dog barks, not the tail wags the dog.
    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
    • AIMINGHIGH123
    • By AIMINGHIGH123 22nd Jan 18, 10:26 PM
    • 22 Posts
    • 23 Thanks
    AIMINGHIGH123
    Ok I have had an email back from hotel. They are willing to supply me with a receipt of parking payment. It doesn!!!8217;t state the time but states payment was made on the day in question.
    They couldn!!!8217;t email PE directly as they said the agreement they have with PE only allows 2 months for them to get involved. They were very apologetic and stated I was misinformed before but said it is the agreement they have with PE.

    Shall I just send that copy to PE now or do I have to write a solid case?
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

2,282Posts Today

8,533Users online

Martin's Twitter