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
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 5th Jan 18, 4:10 PM
    • 50Posts
    • 20Thanks
    Pdmum
    pcn to registered keeper
    • #1
    • 5th Jan 18, 4:10 PM
    pcn to registered keeper 5th Jan 18 at 4:10 PM
    Received pcn as registered keeper. I am not the driver. Put in appeal using template letter which has been rejected. reason for rejection is different to reason shown on PCN. Does this breach POFA 4. If so what do i do now, I have been issued with a POPLA CODE.
Page 4
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 11:55 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    have managed to 'crop' down my comments and am just under 2000 characters with no spaces but just over with spaces.Will this go through ok?
    Can post for final perusal?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Feb 18, 3:57 PM
    • 56,149 Posts
    • 69,811 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Change and to ampersand, change long words into shorter words. Remove connectives.

    You need spaces.
    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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 5:18 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Thanks for that coupon mad, got it down to1934with spaces. If its to the Portal should i add the reference?
    Here it is ready to submit i hope!

    Images of signs are in daylight & not true indicators of conditions at time of the alleged breach
    Entrance sign is low unlit & not in field of vision for driver entering directly from a main road with no approach. P19 &27 contradict operators claim.
    P27 shows signs visible on exit only
    Operator has circled images of signage for clarity
    An exaggerated image is not a true representation of how the signs would appear to a motorist
    Operator says on P3 & P18 sign
    Parking period starts 5 mins after entry (below BPA CoP 10mins)
    Period has been wrongly calculated from time of payment/entry
    Statement below image P18 contradicts operators log P41 , not shown on PCN P5
    Operator’s log shows Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior to date of contravention is irrelevant & misleading, however I the Appellant was not in the vehicle on either occasion
    Operator says Appellants vehicle was parked for 4 hr & 21 mins, payment was made for 4 hr. An unpaid parking session occurred & a PCN was issued. This contradicts copy of PCN shown on P5
    Operator states ‘with regards to Appellants remarks that the parking charge notice is punitive & not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ .
    This statement has never been made by the appellant to the operator. Reference to Parking Eye Ltd v Mr Barry Beavis relates only to signage
    There is no site plan included in contract
    Original contract is undated with hand written amendments
    Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.
    A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date
    Parts 2 3 &4 are missing
    Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &17 are blank
    For these reasons no conclusion can be reached that the PCN has been issued correctly
    There are a catalogue of obvious errors with this evidence & I respectfully ask for POPLA to uphold my appeal & cancel this PCN
    Thank you

    I could also add to last paragraph that no evidence to oppose points 1&2 of appeal?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Feb 18, 5:25 PM
    • 56,149 Posts
    • 69,811 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    If its to the Portal should i add the reference?
    No need because you use the password & POPLA code to access your own spot in the Portal.

    How about:
    PPC had to circle images of signs, proves not prominent.
    instead of:
    Operator has circled images of signage for clarity
    This is far too long:

    Operator's The log shows Appellants vehicle had been parked on site the day prior. to date of contravention is irrelevant & misleading,however I the Appellant I (keeper) was not in the vehicle on either occasion, which could have been two drivers and is irrelevant.
    Lose words there and you can add back some words to the most 'clipped' points, so they make sense.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 11-02-2018 at 5:29 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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 5:56 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Lovely thank you.
    Will edit and show changes .
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 8:18 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Hope this is good to go!

    Images of signs are in daylight & not true indicators of conditions at time of the alleged breach
    Entrance sign is low unlit & not in field of vision for driver entering directly from a main road .with no approach. P19 &27 contradict operators claim of approach.
    P27 shows entry signs visible on exit only
    PPC had to circle images of signs, proves not prominent.
    An exaggerated image is not a true representation of how the signs would appear to a motorist
    Operator says on P3 & P18 sign:-
    Parking period starts 5 mins after entry (below BPA CoP 10mins)
    Period has been wrongly calculated from time of payment/entry
    Statement below image P18 contradicts operators log P41 , and is irrelevant to PCN P5
    The log shows vehicle parked on site the day prior. I (keeper) was not in the vehicle on either occasion, which could have been two drivers and is irrelevant.
    Operator says Appellants vehicle was parked for 4 hr & 21 mins, payment was made for 4 hr. An unpaid parking session occurred & a PCN was issued. This contradicts copy of PCN shown on P5 & is irrelevant.
    Operator states ‘with regards to Appellants remarks that the parking charge notice is punitive & not a genuine pre-estimate of loss’ .
    This statement has never been made by the appellant to the operator. Reference to Parking Eye Ltd v Mr Barry Beavis relates only to signage
    There is no site plan included in contract
    Original contract is undated with hand written amendments
    Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.
    A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date
    Parts 2 3 &4 are missing
    Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &17 are blank
    For these reasons no conclusion can be reached that the PCN has been issued correctly
    There are a catalogue of obvious errors with this evidence & points 1&2 of appeal are unopposed. I respectfully ask for POPLA to uphold my appeal & cancel this PCN
    Thank you
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 11th Feb 18, 9:59 PM
    • 56,149 Posts
    • 69,811 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I would cut & paste all of this to the top, as the contract is your best hand at POPLA:

    There is no site plan included in contract
    Original contract is undated with hand written amendments
    Operator has not provided names of people who have signed the contract & there are no witness signatories for either party.
    A redacted contract cannot prove who signed it & when nor prove that authority was in place at the material date
    Parts 2 3 &4 are missing
    Parts 10 11 13 14 16 &17 are blank
    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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 11th Feb 18, 10:26 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Thank you for all your help with this.
    Fingers crossed!
    Will update the result.
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 23rd Feb 18, 5:53 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    POPLA unsuccessful
    Just heard my appeal has been unsuccessful. Very disapointed , especially as POPLA say 'in assessing this appeal i have considered the evidence provided by the operator to be true as the appellant has failed to rebut their claims' which is totally untrue. Can i complain about this?
    • Redx
    • By Redx 23rd Feb 18, 5:56 PM
    • 17,789 Posts
    • 22,421 Thanks
    Redx
    yes you can complain about it , to the lead assessor, but it wont change the outcome

    what may well change the outcome is any future court case via the MCOL route

    you are under no obligation to pay this unless a judge says so (same as everyone else that receives an invoice, any invoice)
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • The Deep
    • By The Deep 23rd Feb 18, 7:28 PM
    • 9,029 Posts
    • 8,701 Thanks
    The Deep
    This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences.


    Parking Eye, Smart and a smaller company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (who take hundreds of these cases to court, and nearly always lose), who have also been reported to the regulatory authority.


    The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.


    http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41


    and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.
    You never know how far you can go until you go too far.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 23rd Feb 18, 7:39 PM
    • 56,149 Posts
    • 69,811 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Just heard my appeal has been unsuccessful. Very disapointed , especially as POPLA say 'in assessing this appeal i have considered the evidence provided by the operator to be true as the appellant has failed to rebut their claims' which is totally untrue. Can i complain about this?
    Originally posted by Pdmum
    Yes, complain by email to POPLA's complaints email, they'll fob you off, by try.

    Search the forum for 'POPLA lost' to read all the other threads where people lost at POPLA and are all sitting tight, mostly v Premier Park, who seem to win an inordinate number of allegedly questionable POPLA cases.

    No-one here pays!

    At the least the Govt has woken up to this 'outrageous scam' (Hansard 2.2.18).
    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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 23rd Feb 18, 9:12 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Thanks, will complain to Popla and to MP. Not ready to give up yet!
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 26th Feb 18, 11:43 AM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    POPLA complaint
    Will someone be so kind to comment on this before i send. Thanks.

    Dear Mr Gallagher,
    I am writing to complain about the handling of my case xxxxx.
    There has been a procedural error which is highlighted in the assessors comments which state “In assessing this appeal I have considered the evidence provided by the operator to be true as the appellant has failed to rebut their claims”
    I did rebut the operators claims as on the whole it was contradictory and irrelevant to the issue of the PCN in question.This was posted on the Portal on 11/2/18 and was shown to have been received.
    Why has this not been taken into account?
    Furthermore I believe decisions are based on factual evidence presented by both parties and application of the BPA Code of Practice and relevant law and are not open to interpretation by an assessor.
    Because of the above my case has been compromised and has not allowed a factual and impartial assessment.
    Thank you for your time
    • DoaM
    • By DoaM 26th Feb 18, 1:20 PM
    • 4,258 Posts
    • 4,303 Thanks
    DoaM
    Looks fine to me.
    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 2nd Mar 18, 3:30 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    popla response
    No real surprise, this is poplas response to my complaint.
    Funny how they are only focusing on signage, when my rebutal was a whole lot more.
    Want to respond but think its pretty pointless and especially as i have already had another demand from Premier Park.
    Guess i will wait now for the courts to decide

    our complaint about POPLA
    Thank you for your email addressed to Mr Gallagher which was passed to me by the POPLA team as I am responsible for responding to complaints.

    I note from your correspondence that you are unhappy with the decision reached by the assessor in your appeal against Premier Park.

    POPLA is an impartial and independent appeals service and we do not act either for the parking operator or the appellant. It is important to explain that it is not our remit to source evidence and documents from either party in support of their submission and our decisions are based on the evidence received from both parties at the time of the appeal. We cannot consider further evidence after the appeal has been completed.

    I have reviewed the assessor’s decision and I am satisfied that the outcome reached is correct.
    I note your comments in regard to the fact that the assessor did not consider your evidence within the appeal response. However, I have looked at the photographs that you have taken in comparison to those given by the parking operator. From this I can see that your photographs are taken at an angle that does not show the signage that is present at the site. The operator has given specific signage from the entrance and throughout from the angles that they would expect an approaching motorist to see.

    Having reviewed the evidence from both parties I do not feel that in omitting any reference to the evidence you provided would have had a material effect on the outcome reached.

    As POPLA is a one-stage process, there is no opportunity for you to appeal the decision.

    As our involvement in your appeal has now concluded you may wish to pursue matters further. For independent legal advice, please contact Citizens Advice at: www.citizensadvice.org.uk or call 0345 404 05 06 (English) or 0345 404 0505 (Welsh).

    In closing, I am sorry that your experience of using our service has not been positive. We have reached the end of our process and my response now concludes our complaints procedure. I trust you will appreciate that there will be no further review of your complaint and it will not be appropriate for us to respond to any further correspondence on this matter.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 2nd Mar 18, 3:37 PM
    • 56,149 Posts
    • 69,811 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Smacks of template 'lip service' to an apology. Doesn't read as genuine at all, does it?

    The amount of times Premier Park now win at POPLA is astonishing, despite not have the right wording in their NTKs (the 29 days is NOT correct when compared to Schedule 4), and despite the fact PP are regularly reported here as issuing predatory tickets, and even having P&D machine times out by several minutes, from the timers on the ANPR cameras (what a jolly wheeze that must be, if true).

    They even won cases where POPLA bent over backwards to interpret utter crap in their favour. The very best (worst) one was the infamous POPLA Assessor who decided that words something like: 'motorised vehicle' in harbour byelaws, included boats and trailers, but not 'cars'!

    You could not make it up. Diabolical from POPLA sometimes.

    No wonder MPs are pushing ahead plans for what we hope will be a fully independent appeals service run by someone competent, like Caroline Sheppard of PATAS fame. She'd take no nonsense.
    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.

    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 2nd Mar 18, 4:12 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Just a 'fob off' really, and quite insulting. Thats my angle on it anyway!
    Have emailed my MP to support.
    In the meantime i will keep reading in readiness.
    So glad i found this forum for myself but can also tell others now who would probably just pay up and put it down to experience.
    • Pdmum
    • By Pdmum 30th Mar 18, 6:53 PM
    • 50 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    Pdmum
    Have received 2nd letter following Lost Popla.
    Letter heading is 'Offer to settle to avoid court proceedings'
    Am thinking its not an LBC, as it mentions recovery via debt recovery, but there is a paragraph that states-
    'In order to comply with all aspects of 'pre-action protocol' and to demonstste attempts to resolve this matter.....
    Is it safe to ignore this one
    Thanks
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 30th Mar 18, 7:16 PM
    • 6,617 Posts
    • 5,803 Thanks
    KeithP
    Who has sent you this letter?
    .
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

1,024Posts Today

7,781Users online

Martin's Twitter