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
    • tesoro234
    • By tesoro234 23rd Jul 18, 11:23 PM
    • 3Posts
    • 0Thanks
    tesoro234
    FlashPark PCN POPLA appeal
    • #1
    • 23rd Jul 18, 11:23 PM
    FlashPark PCN POPLA appeal 23rd Jul 18 at 11:23 PM
    Hi all,
    Have found this forum excellent in helping and reassuring me, and after sending off my original appeal to FlashPark, (details taken from the Newbies thread) which was rejected, I now need to send my appeal to POPLA.
    I am a little unsure of what, exactly, the NTK compliance means, and how Flashpark have actually been 'non compliant'?
    The car park in question is a shared car park, on a small business estate. This particular car parking area has no signs prior to entering. Once inside, there are approximately 15 parking spaces, some with Flashpark notices, some with (Business Name) signs and some blank. I don't know how many business share this area, but I know of 2. It is located at the end of the business estate, and in a position that a driver would need to enter the car park, if only to be able to turn around to get out again, and not seeing parking signs until actually in the car park. So my car, as the registered keeper, was photographed in a space with the (Business Name) sign. The first I know about anything is when a PCN arrived in the post. There is a very clear photograph, of my car, with a 'contravention' - Permitted Parking Only, a location and a single time (ie, no 'period' of time)
    This PCN also says that if the driver pays within 14 days, then the 85 will be reduced to 55 (which is NOT 40%). Strangely, the rejection letter states "as a gesture of goodwill we will accept a reduced payment of 35"!!!!!! Furthermore, if I enter my details on to their website, the total amount they're asking for is 32, which includes a 'web' discount!!!

    There is no evidence of the self ticketer checking to see if anyone was inside the vehicle, or taking any account of the Blue Badge inside the vehicle - there is also a disabled sign on the back of the vehicle, visible in their photograph.

    As it's a Business Estate, I very much doubt the land belongs to FlashPark or the business that took a photograph of my car.

    Having checked FlashParks website, it seems that they refer to 'offending' vehicles, committing 'offences', and that a single photograph is 'strong evidence'....

    Lasty, the rejection letter with POPLA code arrived TWO WEEKS after the date of their letter, as they totally missed out my street number and name on their letter! They also managed to miss out the county I live in, too. So just Name, Village, Postal District and Postcode....

    So, my letter to POPLA was going to say;-
    1. Discount should be 40%
    2. No evidence of Landowner authority
    3. No grace period

    4. No evidence that the car was 'parked', only that it was there at one moment in time.

    5. Insufficient address details on rejection letter

    I intend to use similar wording to other posts on this forum - can anyone help me understand the NTK (ie The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA 2012 - no keeper liability)
    Many thanks for your time, and help :-)
Page 1
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 23rd Jul 18, 11:51 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,665 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #2
    • 23rd Jul 18, 11:51 PM
    • #2
    • 23rd Jul 18, 11:51 PM
    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=74373387#post74373387

    The above extra appeal point worked well recently at POPLA v Flashpark.
    • tesoro234
    • By tesoro234 24th Jul 18, 7:02 AM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    tesoro234
    • #3
    • 24th Jul 18, 7:02 AM
    Self ticketers
    • #3
    • 24th Jul 18, 7:02 AM
    That's great, thanks Coupon-Mad. I'll definitely add that to my response.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 24th Jul 18, 8:44 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,665 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    • #4
    • 24th Jul 18, 8:44 PM
    • #4
    • 24th Jul 18, 8:44 PM
    can anyone help me understand the NTK (ie The Notice to Keeper is not compliant with the POFA 2012 - no keeper liability)
    Have a look at that other FlashPark thread, it's probably in his POPLA appeal draft. If not then it's in other POPLA appeals on here.

    I doubt Flashpark's PCN was worded to comply with para 9 of Schedule 4 of the POFA but you can compare it yourself, word for word, as the Act is linked in the NEWBIES thread.

    You can only use that appeal point if you DID NOT appeal as 'driver' or imply that in your appeal.
    • tesoro234
    • By tesoro234 7th Aug 18, 11:40 AM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    tesoro234
    • #5
    • 7th Aug 18, 11:40 AM
    • #5
    • 7th Aug 18, 11:40 AM
    Great news, email from POPLA today:

    Vehicle Control Solutions have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge.
    Yours sincerely
    POPLA Team
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 7th Aug 18, 11:43 AM
    • 3,285 Posts
    • 2,230 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    • #6
    • 7th Aug 18, 11:43 AM
    • #6
    • 7th Aug 18, 11:43 AM
    Brilliant, well done.
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

426Posts Today

4,962Users online

Martin's Twitter