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
    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 9th Jan 18, 2:08 PM
    • 125Posts
    • 29Thanks
    barafear799
    Euro Car Park (ECP) PCN Matalan POPLA Appeal
    • #1
    • 9th Jan 18, 2:08 PM
    Euro Car Park (ECP) PCN Matalan POPLA Appeal 9th Jan 18 at 2:08 PM
    Hi,

    Yes I have read the newbies thread. Thank you for the advice in there.
    I understand my first step is to appeal online using the template letter for BPA members - however, I did have a query.

    The gist of that letter states the reason for the appeal is the "large lettering and prominence" of the signs.

    Do I use this argument even if this is not necessarily the case - because this is simply step 1 and every appeal will be rejected at this stage anyway. I can then "personalise" my appeal at the POPLA stage?

    In terms of appealing to Matalan - the keeper doesn't have any receipts - the keeper didn't even shop in there - the driver dropped off a relative and waited in the car park for her - believing she wouldn't be "too long" - the PCN letter shows the unpaid stay of the driver as being 35 mins.
    the relative doesn't have any proof of shopping - no receipts/paid by cash - not even sure if they used her Matalan card -

    in terms of an appeal to Matalan would this simply be to the manager of the store?

    Many thanks
    B
    Last edited by barafear799; 01-03-2018 at 3:17 PM. Reason: changing title to match movement in scenario
Page 2
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 1st Mar 18, 2:42 PM
    • 36,811 Posts
    • 83,297 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    At the moment, I've only got three points - although the signage is very poor.....but advice on any other points much appreciated.
    Will try to convert to PDF and put in google drive for viewing.
    I have rather left it to last minute......sorry.....
    Originally posted by barafear799
    Not the landowner
    No standing to issue charges in their own name
    Non POFA complaint NTK
    Inadequate signage
    Not the person who should be pursued


    Use all the template points you can find in post 3 of the NEWBIES that are relevant.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 1st Mar 18, 2:53 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    Not the landowner
    No standing to issue charges in their own name
    Non POFA complaint NTK
    Inadequate signage
    Not the person who should be pursued


    Use all the template points you can find in post 3 of the NEWBIES that are relevant.
    Originally posted by Fruitcake
    From reading other examples, I got confused as to whether the NTK was compliant or not? And how connected it was to "not person to be pursued".
    So I left out the NTK bit.
    I have now posted my draft if you have time please.
    Thanks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Mar 18, 3:40 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    OK, that's good and unless the PCN was received outside of day 15 afterwards, I would not even try to argue about the NTK, which POPLA do consider to be compliant.

    Personally, I would make signage point #1.

    I would strongly recommend you remove the entrance sign image, as that shows the driver could/should have seen that it was 'pay and display' when driving in. So remove it, IMHO.

    I would also remove your first picture of the sign on the wall, because you can read the £85 on it. Alternatively, re-size it to make it half the size so the £85 is unreadable, then use it, saying how far away it is even for a pedestrian to read. Seriously, try that first!

    As for the other pics, I like them. I would add more wording about them, as a narrative pointing out to the Assessor the obvious things that might just tip the balance, e.g:

    ''this sign shows that it is placed on a remote wall of the shop, round the side, next to a walkway, neither near parked cars nor near the entrance doors, nor anywhere near where the car dropped off and drove round, then collected a passenger shopper.''

    ''this sign is inexplicably placed in the middle of a sharp bush at the perimeter of the site in a landscaped area, and nowhere near where the car dropped off and drove''.

    I would add a point #2 (putting ECP on the spot to provide evidence they might not have), something like this, pushing the others down to 3 and 4:

    2. No evidence of where the car was parked, if parked at all during the times shown
    The operator has not shown where the car was parked, if it was parked in the enforcement area of parking bays at all, which is denied. In fact, the driver entered to drop off a passenger, drove round and waited in an area believed to be outside this operative's enforcement boundary, because there were no signs at all, but also no markings to disallow dropping off and collecting items or passengers.

    The driver is adamant they entered into no contract, and the PPC is put to strict proof as to where the signs were placed in the whole site, on the material date, and that dropping off areas and other unmarked corner and side areas actually form part of the authorised site for ticketing. The driver did not cause an obstruction, and was not in the main car park taking up any parking bay at any time, and since the PCN was not issued for obstruction or 'out of bay parking' there is no justification for this unexpected dropping off charge, on any level (neither as an agreed contract, nor breach of contract).

    It is contended that any cars - and of course taxis - dropping off and collecting shoppers enter into no parking contract, unless they also then go and park in the car park. This contention is supported by the fact that the shop provides unmarked (unrestricted) side areas for such activity, as well as for their own lorries to unload. The driver firmly believes they were in an unmarked area, that there were no signs in that place implying a contract, nor was it a no-stopping zone, and the operator has provided no evidence to the contrary.

    This is a retail car park, and there are areas to the side and back of the shopping units and there is nothing to communicate any 'contract' or dropping off rules in those areas, that could possibly give rise to a driver believing they were expected to pay and display when not taking up a parking bay. There were not even any signs to expect a driver to seek out, in the area where the driver stopped and drove round, then picked up a passenger. The operator must provide a site plan, contemporaneously-dated, showing all areas of this retail park and all signs, and defining the boundaries of enforcement and all entrances, including any unmarked areas. The operator will not be able to disprove this with stock photos taken at the parking bays because that is not where the car was dropping off.
    Last edited by Coupon-mad; 01-03-2018 at 3:49 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.

    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 1st Mar 18, 3:51 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    Many thanks for your feedback.
    The entry sign was included in ECP's rejection letter of my original appeal.
    I felt it was relevant because it didn't specifically show the penalty charge.
    But happy to remove.
    Are you suggesting arguing it was not seen at all (being on the passenger side)
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Mar 18, 3:54 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes, you could say so, but I would not provide a picture of it yourself.
    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.

    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 1st Mar 18, 4:40 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    I've had another look at the car park to see if there were any "drop off points" - once you enter into the car park - it's all spaces.
    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.9008398,-0.2030478,3a,75y,172.12h,46.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdUravQIVUKcJmOO8jqrNag!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656?hl=en

    So might have to adapt your words - or leave out?

    I did mention the possibility of finding a space or dropping off and waiting for passenger within my "signage" paragraph.

    Albeit the time duration is 40 mins - so stretching any GP - although Christmas rush.....
    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 1st Mar 18, 5:25 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    Any suggestions on whether I should include a section on "dropping off" and not actually parking - given there are very few areas of the car park that would not be construed as "chargeable" parking spaces (see Google Maps if time permits).

    I would just like to reiterate my massive thanks to the experts on this forum.
    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 1st Mar 18, 7:12 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    Sorry - I don't mean to keep replying to my own thread.
    When I upload my PDF document to Popla - do I need to include my Popla Ref no (10 digits) or just the original PCN number from ECP?

    Thank you.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 1st Mar 18, 7:49 PM
    • 2,765 Posts
    • 3,439 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Popla ref, of course. They’re not going to understand any other ref.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 1st Mar 18, 8:15 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Don't bin my words, they were written with me knowing nothing about the site, but who cares?

    The point of my words is to force ECP to produce some evidence they do not have. Use the wording as is. There must be space for lorries to unload round the side, etc., and this is then for ECP to disprove.

    It's about making your POPLA appeal long, and hard to contest.

    They will NOT be able to show where your car was stopped, because they don't have CCTV.
    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.

    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 1st Mar 18, 9:54 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    In terms of the Popla ref, I meant do I need to actually include it on my PDF? Clearly when uploading, I entered the popla code. I did not bin your words CM. I am very very grateful. Unfortunately, I had to upload earlier tonight due to time limit and being unable to access a computer until Monday. I'll let you know the outcome. Once again thanks for all your valuable help.
    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 8th Mar 18, 3:57 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    ECP have replied to my appeal.
    One thing I notice is that the "landowner authority" (if that what it purports to do) is with Matalan, whereas I am 99%+ sure the land is actually owned by a real estate company (presumably Matalan pay them rent) - does the agreement NEED to be with the owner or would an agreement with Matalan suffice?

    Clearly, they completely ignore my popla appeal and original appeal.

    They state in their "response to my evidence" :

    At one stage, they summarise my original appeal by stating :

    Refused to name the driver.

    A few paragraphs later they state:

    Mr Joe Bloggs appealled the PCN and confirmed he was the driver on the day, therefore the liability remains with Mr Joe Bloggs.......

    .....

    So in one sentence, they state I refused to name the driver, then in the following they state I confirmed I was the driver.

    Obviously, in my appeal and my popla appeal, at no stage did I name the driver.
    I am the keeper, and the driver is someone else.

    They have provided pictures showing the driver "purportedly" driving in the entrance and then leaving the exit.

    Some times on both photos amount to the difference in time which they show "proves the driver parked on site for that amount of time".

    Advice please?

    I will put up the appeal once I manage to redact it - they've clearly done a "look up and replace" driver with my full name across the whole document.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 8th Mar 18, 6:44 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    One thing I notice is that the "landowner authority" (if that what it purports to do) is with Matalan, whereas I am 99%+ sure the land is actually owned by a real estate company (presumably Matalan pay them rent) - does the agreement NEED to be with the owner or would an agreement with Matalan suffice?
    A corporate tenant who leases the land is the 'landholder' in possession (leasehold title) so I would say yes, Matalan have standing to sign.

    Check for other things like the Matalan signature and job title (redacted?) dates, including the start date and end date. Is it clear whether the contract continues into perpetuity? If not, say so!

    Put this into your concise bullet point comments on the POPLA Portal, as well:
    At one stage, they summarise my original appeal by stating :

    ''Refused to name the driver.''

    A few paragraphs later they state:

    Mr Joe Bloggs appealled the PCN and confirmed he was the driver on the day, therefore the liability remains with Mr Joe Bloggs.......

    So in one sentence, they state I refused to name the driver, then in the following they state (wrongly copied from one they did earlier) that I confirmed I was the driver.

    Obviously, in my appeal and my popla appeal, at no stage did I name the driver.
    I am the keeper, and the driver is someone else.
    Also look at the dates of any photos of the signs. Point out if the photos are old/undated.

    And were the photos of signs taken in the same light conditions? Point out all discrepancies.
    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.

    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 9th Mar 18, 4:20 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    Once again CM, many thanks for your help.
    I have now uploaded the redacted appeal.
    It was quite long, and my adobe editor wasn't playing ball in letting me remove pages -
    so I've redacted whole pages on occasion.
    However, these are only copies of previous items (such as their original rejection letter).
    anyway - if anyone has time to have a quick scan through it.
    I noticed in their documents they state that signs should be at least 1.9m from the ground (to adhere to COP) - some of signs in car park are definitely not that high - obviously I cannot make a "new appeal" - but could I mention that in replying to their evidence.
    Am I limited to the 2000 characters in response?
    what sort of thing should I be including in this response?
    The COP also states "Landowner" - which Matalan clearly isn't......but....

    Anyway - thanks again - and I would welcome comments on their response.

    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1MkyQZcvpmaMfuO0vUSQKv9I5G1BY_sDq
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 9th Mar 18, 9:06 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    some of signs in car park are definitely not that high - obviously I cannot make a "new appeal" - but could I mention that in replying to their evidence.
    Yes you can, bullet points only.

    Am I limited to the 2000 characters in response?
    Yes and I recommend you don't try emailing longer comments. Use the Portal, be very concise.

    what sort of thing should I be including in this response?
    The 2 or 3 things I listed in my reply above.
    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.

    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 12th Mar 18, 1:27 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    Thanks. I just need to summarise/clarify what I need to respond with.

    1) Is this pointing out that ECP's "response" shows that they have assumed I (the keeper) was the driver, despite the fact that they acknowledged that my original appeal to them (via their website) stated quite clearly that I was the keeper, and their summary of my appeal even stated that "the driver was not named". By pointing this out, am I merely showing to the POPLA adjudicator that ECP do not have a coherent argument/case?

    2) Can I now mention that some of their signs (some of which I had included in my photographic evidence) do not comply with the height regulations in accordance with the COP?

    3) In terms of the pictures of the signs they've provided, they are all dated and timed. The alleged parking incident happened in the morning - their picture of the driver entering the car park shows the car with the sun visor down and the driver wearing sunglasses. This would suggest a sunny day - being it was in December, it could be argued it was a low sun. One of my original questions about my POPLA appeal which I'd like to ask about - although I was advised not to include the picture in my POPLA appeal. This relates to the sign at the entrance. My point previously was that it is on the left hand side of the entry point of the car park - the photo they show of the driver clearly shows the driver (wearing sunglasses) looking right (as would be expected in a RHD car). The entry sign is also one of the signs which is clearly not 1.9m from the ground level. Would the advice still be not to mention the "entry sign" at all?

    One more point - which is probably irrelevant or too late to be brought up now. The pay machines are cash only - and I originally believed (when checking out the site) this was the only method of payment - that raised the possibility of the driver needing to find the right change - however, I never believed that would have been a valid point anyway. However, their "response" states that payment by phone is also possible - I'll need to check out the site again - but would it be relevant if I found no mention of this alternative payment method on their signs? Or is it just an aside?

    Many thanks again.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 12th Mar 18, 7:30 PM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    You can't add any new points, just do bullet points and hurry up, you only have SIX DAYS (no, not the seven POPLA say you have) before the POPLA Portal window closes.

    I already said what to mention, keep it brief and don't add layers of stuff POPLA will not read.

    what sort of thing should I be including in this response?
    The 2 or 3 things I listed in my reply above.
    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.

    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 13th Mar 18, 5:45 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    CM> Thanks for the warning about the time limit.
    I'm still a bit confused as to what to write - but I've come up with a draft.

    Page 3 (bottom) of ECP Evidence: Summary of my original appeal where they state my appeal !!!8220;declined to name the driver!!!8221;. By page 7, ECP claim I confirmed I was the driver on the day. Page 8 is a copy of original appeal, once again showing I appealed as the keeper. From page 12 onward, ECP continue to refer to me as the driver. Page 19 of ECP Evidence shows that for signs to be compliant with the COP they must be a minimum of 1.9m from the ground. The sign shown on page 11 is clearly not compliant, as well as not being visible to a driver on the Right Hand side (sign is on the left). The landowner authorisation is signed by Paul Reid for Matalan. There is no indication what his job title is or whether he has authority to sign. Similar comments apply to the ECP signature.

    Have I missed anything? Have I included anything I shouldn't have? Maybe the sign on page 11 (being the sign at the entrance to car park, which I did not include a photo of in my evidence.)

    I will aim to upload tomorrow - hopefully, you can confirm my response by then.

    Thank you loads!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Mar 18, 1:27 AM
    • 58,533 Posts
    • 72,030 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I think the driver/keeper thing is superfluous, if ECP posted the PCN to reach you within 14 days.
    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.

    • barafear799
    • By barafear799 14th Mar 18, 6:42 PM
    • 125 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    barafear799
    Many thanks for all your help. Fingers crossed for the POPLA appeal.
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

617Posts Today

5,820Users online

Martin's Twitter