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
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 3rd Aug 18, 6:05 PM
    • 31Posts
    • 5Thanks
    JeffBezos
    Waiting PCN private area help needed on popla appeal
    • #1
    • 3rd Aug 18, 6:05 PM
    Waiting PCN private area help needed on popla appeal 3rd Aug 18 at 6:05 PM
    Hi all,

    Are there any cases with PCN issued by Park Watch for waiting in a 'loading yard space/road' for less than 5 mins that have won - at POPLA?

    If anyone has advice about WAITING on private land - NOT a car park, that has 'forbidding signage'

    PLEASE HELP - (previous replies left below - but specific help would be really useful)

    Thanks all.

    (and yes, I am the worlds richest man - Jeff Bezos)
    Last edited by JeffBezos; 12-08-2018 at 1:27 PM.
Page 2
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 14th Aug 18, 10:51 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,669 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Hmmm so we can't guess unless he re-posts it.
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 15th Aug 18, 6:55 AM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    Sorry guys. i'll repost it - I didn't want to tip my hat to PW in advance. I think they've caught a lot of people out in this location, yet I can't find a single reference to it.

    I still need to know whether to add some " not like the beavis case" stuff (But what and how please ?)
    Or whether to mention the yellow lines that have always been there?

    I reworded huge parts of it so let me redact personal stuff - really need to get this finished and more than that I need your help experts please...
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 15th Aug 18, 12:06 PM
    • 37,569 Posts
    • 84,506 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    You need to remove the information about who realised they had made a mistake before leaving as this gives away the driver's identity.

    This occurs in other parts of the appeal as well, for example where you say, "adequately inform someone of the regulations" and, "When someone did come to observe the two signs."

    You need to go through the whole appeal with a fine toothcomb and edit out any and instances of this.

    Personally I think there is too much waffle. The mention of a three point turn for example is repeated several time. The assessor is likely to fall asleep with boredom if they have to read everything three times or more.
    I would just mention that the driver was on site for three minutes which is well within the two off ten minute grace periods you have quoted from the CoP. Other opinions are of course available.

    Was an occupant of the car disabled? If not, there is no need to mention signs about this.

    You need to tidy up the !!!8221 formatting errors as well. This is an MSE generated problem, but editing the errors yourself will make it much easier for the regulars to read.
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 15-08-2018 at 12:19 PM.
    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
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 15th Aug 18, 1:49 PM
    • 19,782 Posts
    • 31,244 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    With 6,400 words running to 19 pages of A4 (proportionate? ), there's a real danger that any key point being made is overlooked by the assessor as they churn through the same old copy and paste regurgitated appeal material they must have seen hundreds of times.

    They're human and once they see a paragraph they recognise, there must be many times when they are tempted to jump to the next appeal section - potentially missing a killer point. It seemingly happened in the past few days where a very long appeal, but with a killer point, was jaw-droppingly rejected by POPLA.

    A real risk, as it's virtually impossible to get POPLA to review and change a decision.

    On the other hand it may just bring the PPC to its knees, being too much trouble to tackle all the points, and give up.

    That's the gamble!
    Last edited by Umkomaas; 15-08-2018 at 1:52 PM.
    The fact that I have commented on your thread does not mean I have become your personal adviser. A long list of subsequent questions addressed for my personal attention is unlikely to receive a reply.
    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.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 15th Aug 18, 2:01 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,669 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Make sure nothing implies who parked...go through it with a fine tooth comb.

    I love long POPLA appeals which almost always see a PPC throw in the towel.
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 15th Aug 18, 5:59 PM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    PDF Link to the final Version. (No images and info redacted)

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rog1ZPcXZqwfDUHas5DpqRAjmIR5v2X3/view?usp=sharing

    Any last minute tips or advice?

    Thanks!
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 16th Aug 18, 1:18 AM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,669 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I like that appeal, nice and rambling to send the PPC away, but it makes good points.

    Two typos:

    'locald' - did you mean located?

    and miniscule (twice spelt wrong) should be minuscule.

    And you have missed the template from the NEWBIES thread about the appellant not being shown to be the individual liable.

    And you didn't tell us this is a hired/leased car! SLAM DUNK WIN based on para 13/14 of the POFA Sch4, due to no documents enclosed with the Notice to Hirer the PPC sent you.

    Search the for, say, POPLA paragraph 13 hirer documents to see an example.
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 16th Aug 18, 7:14 AM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    I like that appeal, nice and rambling to send the PPC away, but it makes good points.

    Two typos:

    'locald' - did you mean located?

    and miniscule (twice spelt wrong) should be minuscule.

    And you have missed the template from the NEWBIES thread about the appellant not being shown to be the individual liable.

    And you didn't tell us this is a hired/leased car! SLAM DUNK WIN based on para 13/14 of the POFA Sch4, due to no documents enclosed with the Notice to Hirer the PPC sent you.

    Search the for, say, POPLA paragraph 13 hirer documents to see an example.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad
    Thanks for this, but what?
    PW contacted the company that own the car.
    They then gave my details to PW.
    Then PW sent me the Ntk PCN

    I admitted being the driver in my initial appeal (I'm an idiot)

    What "SLAM DUNK WIN based on para 13/14 of the POFA Sch4, due to no documents enclosed with the Notice to Hirer the PPC sent you." ?

    What should have been sent to me that wasn't please?
    It sounds like I missed something huge here?

    The document sent to me was this one:

    Back
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kaIqYnlb9orO7x5yvKuDo6kNwIcmDW84/view?usp=sharing

    Front:
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wUjQX9wy1jx6uZlN-htzs2j6HXrPH9hV/view?usp=sharing

    What am I missing?

    Many thanks indeed!
    Last edited by JeffBezos; 16-08-2018 at 7:43 AM.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 16th Aug 18, 8:54 AM
    • 37,524 Posts
    • 21,732 Thanks
    Quentin
    Too late now to use any Pofa arguments since you told them you were the driver!
    Last edited by Quentin; 16-08-2018 at 11:30 AM.
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 16th Aug 18, 10:03 PM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    Submit this or not? What do you think?
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 16th Aug 18, 10:19 PM
    • 19,782 Posts
    • 31,244 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Sooner or later you have to go with it and take responsibility for your action. You really don't want someone coming back saying this needs a fundamental root and branch reworking - do you?

    Not sure how (if at all, maybe you've even increased the volume of verbiage) the current version varies from the one you posted a few days ago, but there was enough there to put most PPCs off responding.

    Just make sure POPLA can see and read your key points and that they're not drowned in all the text with which you've managed to swell this.

    Coupon-mad seems to have given the thumbs up - you absolutely can't get a better imprimatur.
    The fact that I have commented on your thread does not mean I have become your personal adviser. A long list of subsequent questions addressed for my personal attention is unlikely to receive a reply.
    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.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 16th Aug 18, 11:59 PM
    • 62,736 Posts
    • 75,669 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I admitted being the driver in my initial appeal (I'm an idiot)
    You binned the slam dunk win then.

    And you cannot use any wording about the POFA, the NTK, or lack of keeper liability.
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 17th Aug 18, 7:06 AM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    Coupon-mad + Umkomaas

    Many thanks for your help and guidance.

    I'll post the appeal PDF here in full. Images etc for all (win or lose) when I get the decision.
    Plus whatever the decision is...

    Fingers crossed!
    Last edited by JeffBezos; 17-08-2018 at 3:14 PM.
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 5th Sep 18, 3:15 PM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    Park Watch supplied "evidence" need help
    Hi, need some advice please... I only have 7 days! (so I'd really appreciate it)

    PW have responded to my POPLA appeal.

    Their evidence seems to be pure rubbish, but as I've not done this before - what do I do now?
    Respond to each of their points On the form on POPLA or by trying to attach another PDF?

    This is their evidence presented to popla:


    The above parking charge notice was issued for the following reason:
    No Waiting. Park Watch wishes to respond to the appellant's appeal as follows:-

    • The land the appellant's vehicle has entered is private land Park Watch has been given authorisation from the landlord to manage this land in line with the terms and conditions that are displayed in this area (Ev IA, 1B & 2).

    They have provided an image of the blue P sign which is NOT an image of the sign in the area!
    The picture they have provided POPLA with has in large letters:


    NO PARKING OR WAITING AT ANY TIME – SEE NOTICES ON ACCESS ROAD FOR INFORMATION
    (this image also states – on behalf of (and then has the new shopping centre owners name)

    The only sign there that contains the blue P sign in the area contains the wording:
    PARKING CONDITIONS APPLY – SEE NOTICES IN THE CAR PARK FOR DETAILS
    (this image also states – on behalf of (and then has the OLD shopping centre owners name)



    • The Keeper was issued with a parking charge notice Notice to Owner letter dated #### July 2018 informing them of the alleged contravention (Ev 3A).
    • A transfer of liability was provided on the #### July 2018 (Ev3B).
    • A Notice to Hirer was issued on the #### July 2018 (Ev3C)
    • An email of appeal was received from the appellant on #### July 2018, Park Watch rejected the appeal and responded by letter dated #### July 2018 informing the appellant of the outcome of their appeal.

    • In photographic evidence (4A - 4C) you can see from the images that the appellants vehicle has entered onto the private land and remains there for a period of 3 minutes. Signage is visible within the photographic evidence. All have clear time and date stamps.


    Here PW have attached huge images where the time stamp is clearly visible
    On the PCN sent to me were 2 tiny images where the timestamps were NOT visible at all??


    • There is signage clearly displayed stating the terms and conditions on the wall adjacent to the vehicle on both sides.Evidence 5A is evidence of the Entrance sign displayed upon the wall as a motorist would enter the service area via the only entrance/exit. Evidence 5B is an overview of the Entrance with the signs displayed.


    The PW 5A image shows the previously mentioned sign on the wall INSIDE the service area!
    (there is NO entrance signage outside, at all)

    It is also the sign contained in my appeal (mentioned above) NOT the picture they have provided as evidence (see above point)


    • Evidence 6A — 6D is evidence of the warning signs up and down the service road on both sides of the road.There is not an offer to Park or Wait, the signage clearly states that 'No Parking at Any Time', 'No Waiting at Any Time' & 'Do Not Park on Double Yellow Lines'.

    What does this mean?
    If there was NOT an offer then In the case where the signage is written in such a way that it forbids you from parking, then logically there is no contract. If there is no contract, the terms of that contract cannot be enforced (e.g. the £100 parking charge for breaching the contract).


    Is that correct please?


    • The appellant has not provided any evidence to Park Watch or POPLA to support their claim to have permission to be there.

    I explained WHY I was there and that I left immediately after I had realised my mistake?


    • Evidence 7 is a site plan showing where the signs are displayed.
    • The land is not a car park and does not require a 10 minute grace period, no parking or waiting is permitted. Taking into consideration the size of the said area and numerous signs displayed. A 2 minute grace period is operated and has been exceeded. Within the appellants own evidence they quote 13.2 of the BPA code of practice 'if the parking location is one where parking is normally permitted' — the location is clearly a service area with double yellow lines throughout and therefore parking is not permitted.

    What does that mean and what should I say to answer this?

    And 2 MINUTES GRACE? How do I answer that?


    • The signage displayed, both entrance and warning signage, in terms of size, amount and wording are within the guidelines stipulated within the BPA's code of practice and is conspicuous and legible. You can see from Ev5A entrance signs are displayed upon the entrance, it is not expected for a motorist to read the signage whist driving. The purpose of the entrance signage is to alert motorist that terms and conditions apply and to acknowledge the signage within the car park. Entrance signs are also visible within the appellants own evidence. Within Ev4A the appellant has stopped adjacent to out signage.

    There is no entrance signage? The only signs are well inside the yard? What to do here please?


    • We have operated on this site since 27/2/13 as per the licence agreement and terms existed prior to the issuing of the PCN for the ### July 2018, please see Ev8 as evidence of the new signage in place on the ### June 2018.
    • The appellants point regarding ANPR has no relevance to this PCN. ANPR is not operated at this site.

    I don’t understand this? What have they sent me as a time stamped image if it was NOT ANPR?
    How do I answer this please??


    They have sent a copy of a licence agreement signed in 2013 – the contract has the name of the previous shopping centre owner (the centre was renamed by its new owners last year)

    • When entering onto private land it is the motorist's responsibility to ensure that they comply with the terms and conditions that are displayed. Park Watch has taken reasonable steps to inform the appellant of the terms and conditions that apply to this land.
    • Park watch believes that the parking charge notice has been issued correctly.
    • Supporting evidence & documentation attached.


    This is the agreement they attached dated 2013: (I believe the site was sold to new owners in 2015)

    CUSTOMER LICENSE AGREEMENTPLEASE READ CAREFULLY BEFORE SIGNING ACCEPTANCE OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS BELOW
    • The service may only be used in conjunction with licence agreement on privately owned land as declared below (refer to the address of parking control area below) for which you have authorisation over.
    • Only items of equipment and signs Issued by the company may be used In Conjunction with this service.
    • Contractual warning signs shall be erected in clear prominent positions and kept at all times clearly visible and free {rom obstruction by the client
    • A parking charge may only be Issued to a vehicle that park in contravention OF the restrictions on the land after the erection of the contractual warn(ng signs,
    • Park Watch (the company) Shall not process any parking charge issued by the dent until the company is In receipt of the Signed customer License agreement
    • The customer shall notify the company In writing of any change of ownership to the land



    …………..LOOKS LIKE 2 WHITED OUT BULLET POINTS HERE ??...........


    • The company shall undertake all costs Incurred In relation to the enforcement of the parking charge.
    • The company shall not disclose any data obtained from the DVLA to the customer, nor shell the company disclose any data regarding the customer to the motorist unless required to do so by Law.
    • The license agreement Is valid for a period of 12 months from the date below., the term will automatically renew, unless the client or company serves 3 months' notice terminating this agreement, such nonce to expire on the last day of the current term
    • During this period the client will not appoint or allow any third party to undertake parking management duties or enforcement of the said Site.
    • The Company requires the customer to ensure that all self-ticketing staff adheres to the British Parking association code of practice.
    CUSTOMER DETAILS

    ADDRESS 'l :Centre Management Suite ADDRESS 2: #####ADDRESS 3: ####
    COUNTY LOCATION DETAILSLOCATION: #### Shopping Centro
    NO OF BAYS Car Park 700 /service yards
    Dated 2013 ?


    Any and all advice greatly, greatly appreciated - Thanks
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 5th Sep 18, 3:29 PM
    • 9,845 Posts
    • 10,187 Thanks
    KeithP
    You need to go through their evidence with a fine tooth comb.
    Find every mistake they have made.
    Point out all the points in your appeal that they have not challenged, and have thus accepted.

    We have even seen car park sign images from car parks hundreds of miles away.

    Be thorough, but remember you only have 2,000 characters for your response.
    .
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 5th Sep 18, 3:33 PM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    You need to go through their evidence with a fine tooth comb.
    Find every mistake they have made.
    Point out all the points in your appeal that they have not challenged, and have thus accepted.

    We have even seen car park sign images from car parks hundreds of miles away.

    Be thorough, but remember you only have 2,000 characters for your response.
    Originally posted by KeithP
    Thanks - so anything they have not challenged, they have accepted? Or treat it that way?

    Do you know how they could have provided time stamped images without using ANPR?
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 5th Sep 18, 3:39 PM
    • 9,845 Posts
    • 10,187 Thanks
    KeithP
    Do you know how they could have provided time stamped images without using ANPR?
    Originally posted by JeffBezos
    Without reading the whole of your thread again, or indeed reading the operator's comments, time stamped images can easily be created using a mobile phone.
    .
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 5th Sep 18, 3:48 PM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    Without reading the whole of your thread again, or indeed reading the operator's comments, time stamped images can easily be created using a mobile phone.
    Originally posted by KeithP
    Is that legal? Anyone could take a couple of photos and add a timestamp right? How do PW prove to popla that the images are real and accurate? I'm assuming the times are correct and I was waiting for 3 mins - But how do I know that it wasn't 1min? I only have their word for it ... Is that a point or not?

    By the way - that's the PW evidence in its entirety with my added points in BOLD throughout. There's not much there really.
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 5th Sep 18, 4:12 PM
    • 3,714 Posts
    • 4,524 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Yes, of course it is legal. You cant have gotten this far and believed otherwise, because its tld to newbies over and over. THIS IS NOT A STATUTORY PROCESS - this is purely civil. Meaning balance of probabilities is al lthat is needed and there are NO regulations they have to follow.

    They state they are, POPLA accepts it. Same as if they provided them to a Judge - if they are deemed true, theyre true. HOw do you think real court works when you have two witnesses, one saying the opposite of the other?

    IT IS NOT A POINT. DROP IT

    So you need to point out, to POPLA:
    1) appeal point A, C, E have not been challenged by the operator and are therefore accepted. The appeal MSUT be upheld.
    2) APpela point B has been answered, howevr the Operator is misleading POPLA. Evidence X is in fact NOT on the site. See my Evidence XYZ.
    3) The operator has accepted that no contract was ever offered, meanig no charge can be issued as no contract was breached. POPLA cannot rule that a failure to offer a contract means a contract was offered.

    And so on...
    • JeffBezos
    • By JeffBezos 5th Sep 18, 10:13 PM
    • 31 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    JeffBezos
    Yes, of course it is legal. You cant have gotten this far and believed otherwise, because its tld to newbies over and over. THIS IS NOT A STATUTORY PROCESS - this is purely civil. Meaning balance of probabilities is al lthat is needed and there are NO regulations they have to follow.

    They state they are, POPLA accepts it. Same as if they provided them to a Judge - if they are deemed true, theyre true. HOw do you think real court works when you have two witnesses, one saying the opposite of the other?

    IT IS NOT A POINT. DROP IT

    So you need to point out, to POPLA:
    1) appeal point A, C, E have not been challenged by the operator and are therefore accepted. The appeal MSUT be upheld.
    2) APpela point B has been answered, howevr the Operator is misleading POPLA. Evidence X is in fact NOT on the site. See my Evidence XYZ.
    3) The operator has accepted that no contract was ever offered, meanig no charge can be issued as no contract was breached. POPLA cannot rule that a failure to offer a contract means a contract was offered.

    And so on...
    Originally posted by nosferatu1001
    Thanks - so ignore image time stamps and the fact that ANPR was not used for the time codes on the images provided.

    None of the images originally provided to me had any legible time stamps - so that is still relevant ? Or not?

    1) What I do (if I understand) is I find appeal points (you just used random letters (or did you mean specifically?) that were NOT challenged - then claim that they have therefore been accepted and that because of that my appeal should be upheld.

    2) Then the fact that they have supplied false images and misleading evidence then refer to my solid proof of that.

    3) popla (can not?) can not rule that a failure to offer a contract means a contract was offered.

    Is that a fact to be stated or how would I word that correctly (please)

    ALL this help is really needed and appreciated so many thanks guys!
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

1,606Posts Today

7,644Users online

Martin's Twitter