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
    • TonsOfPhun
    • By TonsOfPhun 8th Jan 18, 5:53 PM
    • 12Posts
    • 0Thanks
    TonsOfPhun
    Motorcycle on Pavement - Ricoh Arena Shopping Centre
    • #1
    • 8th Jan 18, 5:53 PM
    Motorcycle on Pavement - Ricoh Arena Shopping Centre 8th Jan 18 at 5:53 PM
    Hi,

    Let me start by saying that I've been reading the forums here for a while, and have tried to take the "polite" route since I honestly thought I wasn't in the wrong.

    My first and foremost question is wether I should pay up now £100 or fight back and go to court.
    The incident is as follows:
    - I popped into the Tesco at Ricoh arena using my motorcycle
    - I did park on the pavement behind the bollards and double yellow line
    - I did not see any signs; I have photographic evidence that where I was parked there are no signs
    - There is a motorcycle bay, which I don't know where it is; there are no signs directing people towards it, there are no terms in the signs stating motorcycles have to park there

    I first appealed to the operator (Defence Systems/ Park Watch) and they rejected my appeal, stating there are over 90 signs. I went back and took pictures of the signs; they are very small and hard to read even from 5 feet away (and certainly not whilst riding).

    I then proceeded with a POPLA appeal, where I stated:
    - There are no signs anywhere near where I was parked
    - There are no signs stating there is a motorcycle bay, and that motorcyclists should go there
    - The existing signs are too small to read from a distance

    The appeal was rejected, the POPLA response was that:
    - My pictures are cropped, and therefore they are not satisfied that they show a true reflection of the area!
    - Furthemore, POPLA states that the pictures provided by the operator are accurate to the BPA standards!
    - It is my duty to find out what the terms of the car park are and that by parking there I accepted the contract.

    In all honesty, this isn't about money. I am seriously contemplating paying the fine and be done with it, however, during the POPLA appeal, Defence Systems/Park Watch uploaded the contract with the Landowner, which raises an interesting point:

    - The contract is about the car parking bays, and the bus interchange, therefore it would appear to me that the operator has no right to issue a PCN for where I was parked; behind the bollards, and outside the main car park, and nowhere near a car park bay.
    - Furthermore, it seems very strange to me that POPLA so easily dismissed my claim of no signs present when I did present at least 5 pictures of the area, yet took the word of the operator that there are signs in the area.

    What do you think? Should I just shut up and pay, or should I let them take me to small claims court?

    I haven't yet received anything in the post from them, a debt collection agency, or the court, and if I understand this correctly, I have 28 days from today, to pay the 100 pounds.

    In all honesty, I didn't think parking there was wrong, numerous traffic wardens in Coventry have told me I can park on the sidewalk, provided I am not obstructing, and that I am not parked where blind people or prams might be going through.

    The only reason I was parked there is because at least two wardens have told me that. Also, I honestly believe that their signs are too small to read, and they state absolutely nothing about motorcycles or about a motorcycle bay. I had no idea of the presence of the signs, until after the PCN.
    The PCN is for: "Not parked wholly within bay".

    Many thanks,
    A.

    PS: If you want the full POPLA rejection I will copy-paste it.
    PS2: If you want pictures, I can upload them.
Page 1
    • waamo
    • By waamo 8th Jan 18, 6:04 PM
    • 3,386 Posts
    • 4,500 Thanks
    waamo
    • #2
    • 8th Jan 18, 6:04 PM
    • #2
    • 8th Jan 18, 6:04 PM
    Currently the odds of going to court look slim. It looks like they try to get easy targets
    http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Defence_Systems.html
    This space for hire.
    • TonsOfPhun
    • By TonsOfPhun 8th Jan 18, 6:10 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    TonsOfPhun
    • #3
    • 8th Jan 18, 6:10 PM
    • #3
    • 8th Jan 18, 6:10 PM
    Thanks waamo, I guess I'll just sit and wait to see what happens?
    My argument that their contract doesn't cover the area I was parked, does it seem legit in your opinion?
    I was reading their contract with the landowner and it says nothing about the area I was in, nor does it mention parking in sidewalks/pavements.
    Last edited by TonsOfPhun; 08-01-2018 at 8:05 PM.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 8th Jan 18, 8:35 PM
    • 2,748 Posts
    • 3,411 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #4
    • 8th Jan 18, 8:35 PM
    • #4
    • 8th Jan 18, 8:35 PM
    Sit tight

    It!!!8217;s not just landowner contract, it!!!8217;s that there aren!!!8217;t signs there either. And if the signs are that small then the core term wouldn!!!8217;t be visible ie the Parking charge
    • TonsOfPhun
    • By TonsOfPhun 9th Jan 18, 6:23 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    TonsOfPhun
    • #5
    • 9th Jan 18, 6:23 PM
    • #5
    • 9th Jan 18, 6:23 PM
    Do you guys think it is worth making a complaint at POPLA?
    The exact reasoning seems very biased to me:

    I acknowledge the photographic evidence provided by the appellant to show the lack of signage on site, however these photographs either distant or cropped and I am not satisfied that these show a true reflection of the area.
    So basically the POPLA assessor (Louise Dack) seems to base her assessment on the fact that my photographic evidence (which she acknowledges) are distant or cropped and thus are fake?!

    The operator has provided pictures of signage (there are some but very small and not present in where I was parked) and the assessor commented

    The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage on site, including entrance signs which signpost the motorist to the full terms available within the car park. On looking at the evidence provided, I am satisfied that these terms have been displayed clearly and sufficiently and in line with the BPA Code of practice
    So as far as I understand the assessor refused to accept my photographic evidence of absence of signs, but not only accepted the photos of the operator, but also concluded they are in line with BPA? Furthermore, the operator didn't even bother to argue that there are signs in the area (there aren't, only at other parts of the car park).

    In any case, I've managed to find the contract the car park operator has with the landowner, and it states:

    The monitoring of all cark park bays in the main customer car park, the access control of the bus interchange, and the issuing of parking charge notices for failing to adhere to the terms and conditions of parking as displayed throughout this location.
    They have attached a map of the shopping centre; interestingly enough where I was parked is not in the main car park, or near a car park bay, or the bus interchange. It was on the pathway near Tesco, outside of the main car park.
    Thus my first argument is that they had no right to issue a parking charge notice.

    The main argument I used with POPLA (that there are no signs around where I was parked) was rejected by POPLA because there are other signs around the car park. Seeing that POPLA already rejected this argument, I would assume this would be a weaker argument in a small claims court?

    I can further argue that the signs that are in the car park are too small to be read whilst driving, but since POPLA states they are BPA-compliant, maybe that is also a weak argument?

    Sadly the forum isn't letting me post URL's to the uploaded pictures.
    Last edited by TonsOfPhun; 09-01-2018 at 6:26 PM.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 9th Jan 18, 6:27 PM
    • 2,748 Posts
    • 3,411 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    • #6
    • 9th Jan 18, 6:27 PM
    • #6
    • 9th Jan 18, 6:27 PM
    Of course it!!!8217;s not weakened. Popla aren!!!8217;t a court. They have no influence on a court.
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

1,539Posts Today

8,282Users online

Martin's Twitter