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
    • CitizenSteve
    • By CitizenSteve 10th Aug 18, 8:37 PM
    • 16Posts
    • 8Thanks
    CitizenSteve
    POPLA Appeal
    • #1
    • 10th Aug 18, 8:37 PM
    POPLA Appeal 10th Aug 18 at 8:37 PM
    Hi

    Any chance on some advice on my POPLA appeal - CEL comments in black, my comments in red. Any advice would be appreciated.

    Hi all - a quick update
    CEL have submitted the following...
    RESPONSE TO POPLA APPEAL
    1. There are many clear and visible signs displayed in the car park advising drivers of
    the terms and conditions applicable when parking in the car park. Drivers are
    permitted to park in the car park in accordance with the terms and conditions
    displayed on the signage. These signs constitute an offer by us to enter into a
    contract with the drivers.
    They attach photos of the signs - this does not explain why the driver did not notice them - it was dark at time of parking
    2. Our Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras recorded the Appellant’s
    vehicle, registration number in the car park during the date and time shown on the
    front summary sheet of thisonsiderately so the entrance appeal.
    this evidence is not being contested by driver
    3. There is more than adequate signage in the car park, as can be seen from the
    attached site plan. Furthermore, the car park has sufficient lighting and warnings for
    the Appellant to have acknowledged the signs, and which the Appellant accepted by
    their actions.
    There is no evidence that the signage was lit adequately at the time the driver was parked on property
    4. We refer you to the Court of Appeal authority of Vine v Waltham Forest London
    Borough Council [2000] 4 All ER 169 which states:
    “the presence of notices which are posted where they are bound to be seen,
    for example at the entrance to a private car park, which are of a type which
    the car driver would be bound to have read, will lead to a finding that the car
    driver had knowledge of and appreciated the warning”.
    5. The nature of the relationship between the Appellant and our company is contractual.
    The car park is private land and consequently drivers require permission before
    parking on the land. The Company granted permission by way of making an offer in
    the signs displayed in the car parks and the Appellant accepted that offer and the
    terms set out on the signs by their conduct in parking on the land.
    driver is not familiar with this case but was not made aware of entering into any contract
    6. As previously stated, there was ample signage throughout the site, such that the
    Appellant had an opportunity to read them, including signage at the entrance to the
    car park
    surely the driver needs to focus on driving safely and considerately so, surely they are not expected to read signage in detail at entrance to a car park whilst driving. Re the other signs, there is no evidence that the driver was parked whre sign could be read in poor light. .
    7. The British Parking Association advises all motorists:
    “Regardless of whether they park in private car parks, Council car parks or
    on-street, motorists should always park properly and always check any
    signage displayed to make sure they know and understand the rules that
    apply. This is especially so if they are visiting for the first time - in order to
    acquaint themselves with the prevailing Terms & Conditions for parking.”
    Horton House, Exchange Flags, Liverpool L2 3PF
    Tel: 0115 822 5020
    Registered Office as above. Company Registered in England. Company Registration Number 05645677
    Page3
    the driver is grateful for this advice but was not in receipt of it or aware of it at the time of parking
    8. When parking on private land a motorist freely enters into an agreement to abide by
    the conditions of parking, in return for permission to park. Therefore, the onus was on
    the Appellant to ensure that they could abide by any clearly displayed conditions.
    Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 - Our Charges
    9. The charge sought is a contractual term, which is within the recommended British
    Parking Association (BPA) guidelines, and is compliant the BPA code.
    10. The Supreme Court, in their judgment of the recent Parking Eye v Beavis appeal,
    stated that:
    “…the charge does not contravene the penalty rule, or the Unfair
    Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.”
    A summary of the Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of Parking Eye v Beavis has been
    included in the Operator’s evidence pack, but can also be accessed using the following link:
    (unable to post links) supremecourt press-summary(pdf)
    I need time to read this in detail before advising driver
    11. We submit that the charge does not cause a significant imbalance of the parties’
    rights and obligations arising under the Contract. Furthermore, Lord Neuberger and
    Lord Sumption asserted the following in the above Supreme Court judgment:
    “Any imbalance in the parties’ rights did not arise ‘contrary to the requirements
    of good faith’, because ParkingEye and the owners had a legitimate interest
    in inducing Mr Beavis not to overstay in order to efficiently manage the car
    park for the benefit of the generality of users of the retail outlets.”
    It would therefore be erroneous to conclude that the sum claimed must be a genuine preestimation
    of loss.
    Horton House, Exchange Flags, Liverpool L2 3PF
    Tel: 0115 822 5020
    Registered Office as above. Company Registered in England. Company Registration Number 05645677
    Page4
    Additional Notes
    The Notice was issued as the Appellant failed to obtain an electronic permit for his
    vehicle, registration [drivers number plate]. Electronic permits can be obtained by entering your
    vehicle registration on the touchscreens provided inside the facilities. Please note
    that the Appellant has admitted to being the driver on the day in question and does
    not dispute the duration of stay within the car park.
    The driver did see the words "Anthology Customer & visitor Permit Holder Parking Only on the entrance sign - surely this implies that the paying customers are authorised to use the car park free of charge. Other signs in the car park say otherwise, but why would driver read another sign having already read "AQnthology Customer and Visitor Permit Holder Parking Only"? Driver has submitted a photo of this sign. The sign says (in smaller font) "See car park terms and conditions" but is concerned that he would not have time to read all this while driving with due care and attention
    13. We refer you to the attached photographic evidence of the vehicle, captured by our
    Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras, entering the car park at
    22:15 and departing at 23:10 (total duration of 55 minutes).
    14. Signage in the car park clearly states "PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY – ANTHOLOGY
    CUSTOMERS & VISITORS MUST REGISTER FOR A PERMIT ON A TOUCH
    SCREEN INSIDE ANTHOLOGY. If you breach any of these terms you will be
    charged £100."
    other signs in the car park (or to the entrance) do not state that "VISITORS MUST REGISTER FOR A PERMIT ON A TOUCH SCREEN INSIDE ANTHOLOGY" - why would the driver (paying customer) read a different sign? Even if he did, the conflicting messages could confuse him
    Horton House, Exchange Flags, Liverpool L2 3PF
    Tel: 0115 822 5020
    Registered Office as above. Company Registered in England. Company Registration Number 05645677
    Page5
    15. The Appellant failed to register his vehicle, registration [drivers number plate] as can be seen
    from the attached report which shows all the vehicles that had obtained a permit on
    the day in question. The report also demonstrates that other drivers were complying
    with the clearly displayed terms and conditions, and that the touchscreens were in
    good working order on the date of violation.
    Evidence submitted says that others have fallen into this trap.
    (unable to post links)tripadvisorReviews of Anthology - Wilmslow in which many customers have cited 1) Being fned despite being paying customers 2) HAve raied fine with landlord who has allegedly refused to help. It has also been said in parliament that "Poor signage, unreasonable terms, exorbitant fines, aggressive demands for payment and an opaque appeals process, together with some motorists being hit with a fine for just driving in and out of a car park without stopping, have no place in 21st-century Britain." (unable to post links)parliament debates ParkingCodeOfPractice)Bil


    16. Please note that it is the decision of the mangers of the facilities whether they choose
    to advertise the parking terms and conditions on/in their facility. Staff inside the
    facilities are not obligated to bring the parking terms to the public’s attention, and we
    always advise that drivers refer to the signs in the car park, regardless of any
    representations made by a third party (e.g. staff) who was not a party to the parking
    agreement.
    How do landowners ascertain that customers can read the signage? Does this mean that customers are fined for being unable to read the signs or too pre-occupied to read them? While CEL state that "staff inside the facilities are not obliged to bring the the parking terms to the public's attention" - surely there is some obligation to tell their paying customers. CEL also state that "we
    always advise that drivers refer to the signs in the car park" - driver was not aware of or in recepipt of this advice as he does not have a business partnership with CEL

    17. The fact that the Appellant was a customer of the facilities does not invalidate the
    Notice issued. The terms are clearly stated on the signage, in the event that a driver
    fails to adhere to the stated parking terms they will be charged at the Notice level.
    Signs clearly state “PERMIT HOLDERS ONLY…These terms apply at all times”,
    with no exceptions.
    I repeat - other signs in the car park (or to the entrance) do not state that "VISITORS MUST REGISTER FOR A PERMIT ON A TOUCH SCREEN INSIDE ANTHOLOGY" - why would the driver (paying customer) read a different sign? Even if he did, the conflicting messages could confuse him
    18. We refer you to paragraph 3-8 of our response (above) as well as the following
    statement made by the British Parking Association, which advises all motorists:
    “Regardless of whether they park in private car parks, Council car parks or on-street,
    motorists should always park properly and always check any signage displayed to
    make sure they know and understand the rules that apply. This is especially so if
    they are visiting for the first time - in order to acquaint themselves with the prevailing
    Terms & Conditions for parking.”
    Drivers have an obligation to check for signage when parking on private land – the
    signs do not need to be placed directly in the position where they parked, they
    simply must be placed throughout the site so that drivers are given the chance
    to read them (BPA Code of Practice, 18.3).
    19. Please note that we are not relying on the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, as the
    Appellant has admitted that he was the driver of the vehicle. Please note that Section
    21.6 and 21.7 of the BPA code state that the Operator has up to 28 days to apply to
    the DVLA, and once the registered keeper’s details have been obtained, the
    Operator has a further 14 days in which to send the PCN.
    20. The Appellant’s details as the registered keeper were obtained from the DVLA on
    07/06/2018 and the PCN was sent four days later, on 11/06/2018.
    PCN:2363889547
    Vehicle Registration:[drivers number plate]
    Date of Violation:given
    Site:Given
    Duration of Stay:00:55
    Then it's a printout of REPORT OF REGISTERED VEHICLES AT CAR PARK AT
    Interestingly - while they black out the number plates - they can still be cut and pasted

Page 1
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 10th Aug 18, 8:43 PM
    • 11,343 Posts
    • 11,871 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #2
    • 10th Aug 18, 8:43 PM
    • #2
    • 10th Aug 18, 8:43 PM
    Is this any different to what you posted on Tuesday?

    If so, please point out those differences.
    .
    • CitizenSteve
    • By CitizenSteve 10th Aug 18, 9:26 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    CitizenSteve
    • #3
    • 10th Aug 18, 9:26 PM
    • #3
    • 10th Aug 18, 9:26 PM
    it is no different, sorry.

    I'm anxious to get this sorted (going abroad tomorrow), but no loner optimistic TBH.
    Last edited by CitizenSteve; 10-08-2018 at 9:28 PM. Reason: changing error (misinterpretation)
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 10th Aug 18, 10:16 PM
    • 11,343 Posts
    • 11,871 Thanks
    KeithP
    • #4
    • 10th Aug 18, 10:16 PM
    • #4
    • 10th Aug 18, 10:16 PM
    Have a read of this post made less than one hour ago:

    .
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

4,259Posts Today

6,447Users online

Martin's Twitter