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
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 5:34 PM
    • 15Posts
    • 4Thanks
    Alexa777
    Britania Parking PCN - inappropriate display parking ticket ?
    • #1
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:34 PM
    Britania Parking PCN - inappropriate display parking ticket ? 8th Aug 18 at 5:34 PM
    Hi Everyone,

    First of all I want to say thanks to all of you who contributed valuable information.
    I have read the newbies thread but no info particular or I could refer for this case.

    I am here to ask what to write for the pending comments of my POPLA appeal.
    This is the last opportunity in this appeal.

    A PCN landed on windscreen when the driver parked at Southampton West Quay Retail car park while a valid parking ticket is obtained.
    However, the ticket was placed behind the drivers window instead of the dashboard.
    The reason is a float ticket is very likely to fall off from the dashboard when the door shuts.

    *There is a line on the ticket "Display clearly on dashboard this side up"*

    Clearly stated where was the ticket displayed when appeal with Britania and no surprise they declined the claim and an appeal submitted to POPLA with a photo of the ticket.

    Britania also uploaded their evidence with photos of the car that the ticket was not on the dashboard and other regulations.

    May I ask what to write in the comments please ?

    I have outlined three points in the initial POPLA claim as below but still been asked to provide comments on the operators evidence.

    1) A compliant Notice to Keeper was never served - no Keeper Liability can apply.
    2) The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and
    there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself.
    3) No evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance
    with the BPA Code of Practice.

    Claimed as keeper in Britania appeal.
    Claimed as keeper in POPLA appeal.

    Much appreciate any help in advance !

    My comments added below, if no more advice received, this will be submitted.

    1. Britannia provided no evidence that they correctly transferred liability from the driver to the registered keeper nor that PoFA was followed correctly.
    2. Britannia failed to provide NTK as no NTK ever received by the keeper nor in their evidence pack. Britannia didn!!!8217;t challenge this in my appeal then they are deemed to agree with this point.
    3. Britannia is drawing assumptions as to the identity of the driver in this evidence pack, however this is has never established and they have no evidence as to who was driving.
    4. Britannia failed to provide evidence of Landowner Authority. Britannia didn!!!8217;t challenge this in my appeal then they are deemed to agree with this point.
    5. Britannia as a member of BPA failed to adhere to the CoP B20.5b quote !!!8220;In deciding whether a payment ticket has been visibly displayed on a vehicle you must do a thorough visual check of the dashboard and windows!!!8221;. The photos show the attendant failed to check all the side windows.
    6. Signage !!!8211; The significant signage all over the car park only written !!!8220;Pay & Display!!!8221; without specify where to display.
    - Britannia failed BPA CoP B18.3 quote !!!8220;Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing your detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm!!!8221;. The Conditions of use does not meet the CoP requirements of the text size.
    - According to Thornton v. Shoe Lane Parking, the driver is not bound by the terms printed on the ticket if they differ from the notice, because the ticket comes too late. This is also supported by Olley v. Maryborough Court !!!8221;The ticket is no more than a voucher or receipt for the money that has been paid on terms which have been offered and accepted before the ticket is issued". Hence the additional requirements written on the parking ticket is not legally binding.
    7. The driver had obtained and displayed as per the signage contract, there was no intention to defraud the Britannia.
    Last edited by Alexa777; 10-08-2018 at 8:34 PM.
Page 1
    • Le_Kirk
    • By Le_Kirk 8th Aug 18, 5:41 PM
    • 3,285 Posts
    • 2,230 Thanks
    Le_Kirk
    • #2
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:41 PM
    • #2
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:41 PM
    Have you read the Newbie sticky post? If not go there now, using this link to find out all about POPLA. You can also search the forum for RECENT successful POPLA appeals and use the points made in that/those appeal(s).


    ETA Sorry, misread your post, didn't see you had a POPLA appeal rejected. You could still search for POPLA rebuttals.
    Last edited by Le_Kirk; 08-08-2018 at 5:44 PM. Reason: Read the OP properly!
    • Redx
    • By Redx 8th Aug 18, 5:42 PM
    • 19,633 Posts
    • 24,929 Thanks
    Redx
    • #3
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:42 PM
    • #3
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:42 PM
    your rebuttal comments must be based on their evidence pack and show where their errors or omissions are, based on what they have stated

    the appeal should have been based on legal points and your rebuttal by comments are about where they have failed on landowner contract , signage etc, not "what happened on the day"

    see this thread and its links to see what rebuttals look like

    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5833054

    especially see page 4 , post #69


    and remember the comments are limited to 2000 characters (not words) and you cannot introduce any NEW evidence or appeal points
    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
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 8th Aug 18, 5:42 PM
    • 37,524 Posts
    • 21,732 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #4
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:42 PM
    • #4
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:42 PM
    Throughout here the advice is never to reveal the driver.


    Hopefully you haven't done so in your initial appeal


    You need to edit your post to remove details of who was driving


    If you have used your real name as your board name you need to ask MSE to change it to something completely anonymous


    The ppcs monitor this orum and can use your posts against you


    You cannot add to your appeal now, but you can rebut the evidence from the ppc


    See #3 in the newbies faq thread for advice on popla appeals procedure
    • beamerguy
    • By beamerguy 8th Aug 18, 5:52 PM
    • 8,825 Posts
    • 11,709 Thanks
    beamerguy
    • #5
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:52 PM
    • #5
    • 8th Aug 18, 5:52 PM
    I have stated where was the ticket displayed when appeal with Britania and no surprise they declined my claim and I submitted an appeal to POPLA with a photo of the ticket.

    So, you have sent your appeal to POPLA. ?

    Let's see what they say, logic should prevail but nowadays
    with POPLA we are never sure if a real assessor is working
    or the tea boy.

    Floating tickets are common and deemed very trivial by
    the courts especially as you have proof you paid and it
    seems Britannia are not prepared to mitigate but rather
    penalise you
    RBS - MNBA - CAPITAL ONE - LLOYDS

    DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 6:03 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Alexa777
    • #6
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:03 PM
    • #6
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:03 PM
    @beamerguy
    Sorry I cant quote your post as I am too new...

    Yes, Britania has provided their evidence: photos of the car, photos of the ticket machine and the cluases on the ticket machine, their statement, the original PCN, the rejection letter etc.

    And now POPLA is asking me to add my final comments.

    So I guess I need to write something helpful to the case.

    Thanks.
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 6:07 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Alexa777
    • #7
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:07 PM
    • #7
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:07 PM
    @Redx

    Thanks for the useful info.
    I have stated the legal points in my initial POPLA claim as below:
    1. A compliant Notice to Keeper was never served - no Keeper Liability can apply.
    2. The signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and
    there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself.
    3. No evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance
    with the BPA Code of Practice.

    But POPLA is still asking me to add further comments after Britania uploaded their evidence.

    What additional points I could provide please ?
    *I have read few previous posts with comprehensive legal points but only discovered above three to be used in this case.*
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 8th Aug 18, 6:23 PM
    • 9,845 Posts
    • 10,185 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #8
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:23 PM
    • #8
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:23 PM
    What additional points I could provide please ?
    Originally posted by Alexa777
    You don't add 'additional points'.

    You need to go through the PPC's evidence with a fine toothed comb looking for all the mistakes they have made.

    In the past we have seen signs from a car park over 100 miles from the alleged transgression.

    Highlight any of your appeal points that they have failed to challenge.
    If they have failed to challenge any of your appeal points then they are deemed to agree with your point.
    Make that clear to PoPLA.

    You must challenge their evidence or you will lose the appeal, and you only have seven days to do it.

    Get cracking.
    .
    • Redx
    • By Redx 8th Aug 18, 6:23 PM
    • 19,633 Posts
    • 24,929 Thanks
    Redx
    • #9
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:23 PM
    • #9
    • 8th Aug 18, 6:23 PM
    as I stated earlier, you go through their evidence pack and note any BPA CoP failures they have admitted too, any landowner contract errors , omissions and redactions, POFA falures like NTK failures , signage failures on their part, is it the correct car park with their correct signage etc

    if you check the link I gave you it gives links to other rebuttals, so find any and all errors in their evidence pack

    if you have identified 3 errors in their pack then those are your 3 starting points , identify as many as you can find, but ensure your rebuttal fits the 2000 character limit in the portal
    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
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 6:24 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Alexa777
    @Quentin
    Thanks for your reply.
    In the Britannia's evidence letter, I noticed below:

    "As the PCN was appealed before a Notice to Keeper had been issued, the only person as ware of the parking charge at this time would be the driver. We have therefore identified the appellant to be the driver."

    Is this a valid assumption ?
    • Redx
    • By Redx 8th Aug 18, 6:27 PM
    • 19,633 Posts
    • 24,929 Thanks
    Redx
    @Quentin
    Thanks for your reply.
    In the Britannia's evidence letter, I noticed below:

    "As the PCN was appealed before a Notice to Keeper had been issued, the only person as ware of the parking charge at this time would be the driver. We have therefore identified the appellant to be the driver."

    Is this a valid assumption ?
    Originally posted by Alexa777

    no its not , so say so and also state that no NTK was ever served, especially if it is missing from their evidence pack or if they have stated that they never sent one to the KEEPER

    they seem to think they do not have to send one, but in fact they DO have to send one , regardless , because a driver could hand the windscreen pcn to the keeper, then a keeper appeals, which is what happened

    it is errors like that that you are looking for in their pack


    ps:- POPLA are asking you for comments about the PPC evidence pack, they are not asking you for additional appeal points , those were in your initial popla appeal and you are not allowed to add "additional appeal points" at this stage
    Last edited by Redx; 08-08-2018 at 6:30 PM.
    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
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 8th Aug 18, 6:27 PM
    • 9,845 Posts
    • 10,185 Thanks
    KeithP
    @Quentin
    Thanks for your reply.
    In the Britannia's evidence letter, I noticed below:

    "As the PCN was appealed before a Notice to Keeper had been issued, the only person as ware of the parking charge at this time would be the driver. We have therefore identified the appellant to be the driver."

    Is this a valid assumption ?
    Originally posted by Alexa777
    You must strongly challenge that.

    Clearly the driver is allowed to speak to the keeper.
    Armed with the information passed to him by the driver, it is of course entirely reasonable for the keeper to appeal.
    .
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 6:31 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Alexa777
    @KeithP
    Thank you very much !
    Glad I found a point that may work !
    But may I ask further if the driver could speak to the keeper, is it become mandatory that the keeper must reveal who is the drive ?
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 8th Aug 18, 6:33 PM
    • 9,845 Posts
    • 10,185 Thanks
    KeithP
    @KeithP
    Thank you very much !
    Glad I found a point that may work !
    But may I ask further if the driver could speak to the keeper, is it become mandatory that the keeper must reveal who is the drive ?
    Originally posted by Alexa777
    No, the keeper must not disclose the identity of the driver and has no obligation to do so.
    .
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 6:33 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Alexa777
    @Redx
    Thank you, Redx !
    I shall dig further in their evidence and will come back for more advice.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 8th Aug 18, 6:35 PM
    • 37,524 Posts
    • 21,732 Thanks
    Quentin
    No

    You cannot be compelled.

    (They will likely continue with their view of course)

    Are you sure about the initial appeal - do you have a copy to check yourself you never revealed the identity of the driver?
    Last edited by Quentin; 08-08-2018 at 6:38 PM.
    • Unicorn51
    • By Unicorn51 8th Aug 18, 6:51 PM
    • 66 Posts
    • 97 Thanks
    Unicorn51
    If I read your post correct, your ticket was displayed in one of your side windows.


    As they are members of the BPA, they failed to adhere to the Code of Practice.


    20.5b In deciding whether a payment ticket has been visibly displayed on a vehicle you must do a thorough visual check of the dashboard and windows.
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 7:19 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Alexa777
    @Redx
    I have gathered few points from the previous rebuttals you have advised.
    Do these points make sense ?

    1. Britannia have provided no evidence that they correctly transferred liability from the driver to the registered keeper nor that PoFA was followed correctly.
    2. Failed to provide NTK as no NTK ever received by the keeper.
    3. Britannia is drawing assumptions as to the identity of the driver in this pack, however this is has never established and they have no evidence as to who was driving.
    4. Fail to provide evidence of Landowner Authority.
    5. Signage !!!8211; The specific requirement of display on the dashboard is rather small text compare to the large !!!8220;Pay & Display!!!8221; sign which misleading the understanding of !!!8220;display!!!8221;.

    I am not sure about the fifth point as in my opinion from the photos they provided, the only significant signs are "Pay & Display" without mentioning the ticket MUST be put on the dashboard. Although there are very small text on the top of the ticket machine written this information. (Although it is also on the ticket.....)
    It might help if I could upload the photos but I dont know how....

    Thanks for your time.
    • Alexa777
    • By Alexa777 8th Aug 18, 7:24 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    Alexa777
    @Unicorn51
    Yes, it was displayed in one of your side windows !

    This is incrediblily helpful info !
    They photos they provided only show pictures have been taken from different angle of the windscreen.
    Although one angle is right to show the ticket was displayed, the light was too bright to give a clear view.
    Can these photos show they did a thorough check of the windows ?
    My opinion is not as no photos show they have check the passenger seat windows.
    Also does this still apply if they have stated the ticket must be displayed on dashboard/windscreen ?

    Thank you !
    Last edited by Alexa777; 08-08-2018 at 7:28 PM.
    • Redx
    • By Redx 8th Aug 18, 7:41 PM
    • 19,633 Posts
    • 24,929 Thanks
    Redx
    all of the above

    they have to abide by the BPA CoP and so appear to have failed that point mentioned above

    only POPLA or a judge in court can tell you if that small print on the ticket overrides the larger pay and display signage

    but as the driver paid and displayed as per the signage contract, there was no intention to defraud the PPC and so a judge might decide that its an onerous term and that the drivers intentions were honourable, meaning that the PPC should have cancelled when they were notified that a valid ticket was purchased

    this is known as de-minimis , so google it

    so get all of them points into a 2000 character rebuttal and then post the proposed rebuttal so it can be checked
    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
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

585Posts Today

5,116Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @GillsSarah: Interesting! I always used to buy big name products cos I thought they?d be stronger. @MartinSLewis has changed my mind on?

  • RT @think_jessica: Think Jessica the Film 30 min doc/drama based on my mother?s true story. Narrated by @MartinSLewis is now live on https:?

  • RT @kelsher123: @MartinSLewis First time switcher! And no, it wasn?t as challenging as I thought???? A British Gas customer so no brainier. Th?

  • Follow Martin