Parking Solutions 24 - Help please... POPLA

[jellypot]

Hello

I got a PCN on my window for failing to display a ticket from Parking Solutions 24. I had purchased a ticket - it had blown from the dashboard on to the passenger's seat - that was still valid at the time of the PCN being issued.

I stupidly appealed without doing my research under the illusion that because I had a ticket they would just accept the appeal (obviously i'm naive and assumed good will still existed!). I submitted a copy of the ticket, clearly valid at the time of their issuing a PCN, as evidence that I had paid.

They have rejected this appeal stating that it is the responsibility of the driver to ensure the ticket is displayed and this is, therefore, a breach of their contract.

This means I have also stupidly, inadvertently, admitted to being the driver because I did not wait for them to issue a NTK and instead responded to the windscreen ticket.

On paymypcn they have issued clear photos of the vehicle, stamped with time/date, without the ticket on the dashboard. They have also included an image of a sign on site which reads in capital letters

'VEHICLES DISPLAYED A VALID PAY AND DISPLAY TICKET WHILST IN A DESIGNATED BAY"

And in smaller type - "If you park on this land contravening the above terms and conditions the driver is contractually agreeing to pay a parking charge in the sum of £100. Reduced to £60 is paid within 14 days. Further costs will be applied as detailed on the Parking Charge Notice. Non payment will increase to a max of £135 plus additional charges for collection. If unpaid the vehicle keeper details may be requested from the DVLA."

And then in capitals "DO NOT PARK HERE UNLESS OU AGREE TO THE CONTRACTUAL CHARGE"

Is there anything I can do now as a POPLA appeal and still win?

I had paid so there's been no loss of earnings but from research now it seems that this no longer stands up as an argument?

The signage from their photo appears to have been adequate (I did know it was a pay and display car park as I park there often for work, and i had paid, it had just blown off the dashboard as i closed the door and I didn't realise).

Can I make it complicated for them by asking for contracts with the landowner etc?

Does anyone know of a similar case they could point me towards?

Any example POPLA appeals I could look at that would be relevant?

Thanks so much.

[jellypot]

Hi again,

Using templates found from various places i've drafted a rough appeal... could anyone tell me if it has any legs?

To whom it may concern,


Re: Parking Charge Reference No.
Vehicle Registration:
POPLA Appeal Number:


I am the registered keeper of the above vehicle and received a PCN on my windscreen from Parking Solutions 24. I responded to this in a timely manner and my appeal was notified as rejected on DATE. They provided me with the above POPLA code to appeal to you.

The basis of my appeal is on the following grounds:

1) The paper PCN issued on DATE states the reason as being "6. NO P&D TICKET" (see attached image no.1). This is incorrect as a ticket had in fact been purchased and was still valid at the time the PCN was issued (see attached image no. 2).

2) Parking Solutions 24 have provided an image of one example of their signage but without showing proof that this signage is from the site in question and also without showing where this signage was situated in relation to the vehicle in question. So, for this appeal, I put this operator to strict proof of where the car was parked and (from photos taken in the same lighting conditions) how their signs appeared on that date, at that time, from the angle of the driver's perspective.

3) Further to this, the image of the alleged signage provided is blurred in parts, meaning that key information can not be read. The text in the blue box at the top that outlines the contractual agreement is blurred and illegible, and the text in the white box at the bottom is also blurred and illegible. This means that the full terms cannot be read. That full terms cannot be read from a close up image of the sign also suggests that full terms cannot be easily read from a car before parking.

4) The term outlined on the alleged signage simply state: "Vehicles displayed a valid pay and display ticket whilst in a designated bay". The terms do not state where this ticket should be displayed within the vehicle. Therefore whilst the images provided by Parking Solution 24 show no ticket displayed on the dashboard, they do not provide full photographic coverage of all visible material surfaces within the vehicle and therefore cannot be used to provide evidence that a valid ticket was not clearly displayed.

As stated in my original appeal to Parking Solutions 24, the ticket had blown from the dashboard on to the passenger seat of the vehicle at the moment of closing the door. However, as the vehicle has clear glass windows to the front, the parking attendant could easily still have seen the ticket on display within the material vehicle.

Further to this, in their letter providing notification of the rejection of the appeal, the operater states: "by failing to ensure that the Pay and Display ticket was correctly on display, you have breached the terms and conditions of parking". Yet nowhere in their terms and conditions of parking do they outline what would be considered as the 'correct' way to display the ticket.

5) There is no evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice.

I put Parking Solutions 24 to strict proof of the contract terms with the actual landowner of this site (not a lessee or agent). Parking Solutions 24 have no legal status to enforce this charge because their is no assignment of rights to pursue PCNS in the courts in their own name nor standing to form contracts with drivers themselves. They do not own this car park and appear to have a bare licence to put signs up and 'ticket' vehicles on site, merely acting as agents. No evidence has been supplied lawfully showing that Parking Solutions 24 are entitled to pursue these charges in their own right.

I require Parking Solutions 24 to provide a full copy of the contemporaneous, signed and dated, unredacted contract with the landowner. I say that an contract is not compliant wtih the requirements set out in the BPA Code of Practice and does not allow them to charge and issue proceedings for this sum for the alleged contravention in this car park. In order to refute this, it will not be sufficient for Parking Solutions 24 to merely provide a site agreement or witness statement, as these do not show sufficient detail (such as the restrictions, charges and revenue sharing arrangements agreed with a landowner) and may well be signed by a non-landholder such as another agent. In order to comply wtih paragraph 7 of the BPA Code of Practice, a non-landowner private parking company must have a specifically -worded contract with the landowner, not merely an 'agreement' with a non-landholder managing agent - otherwise there is no authority.

Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:

“7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.

7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:

a, the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined

b, any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation

c, any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement

d, who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs

e, the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement”

[ostell]

Your POPLA appeal will be asking them to prove that they have the right to issue charges on the site. You want an unredacted copy of the contract to show this and a witness statement is insufficient.

There is a a long POPLA appeal on Money Saving Expert forums that you could use. Is the amount of the charge apparent on the sign, ie is it easily seen and not hidden in the small text. Perhaps post the image of the sign up.

ThePPC have not taken anyone to court (yet), here's a link to some info so even if you lose at POPLA then just ignore.

Edit our posts have crossed but you seem to have got the idea for POPLA

[jellypot]

Your POPLA appeal will be asking them to prove that they have the right to issue charges on the site. You want an unredacted copy of the contract to show this and a witness statement is insufficient.

There is a a long POPLA appeal on Money Saving Expert forums that you could use. Is the amount of the charge apparent on the sign, ie is it easily seen and not hidden in the small text. Perhaps post the image of the sign up.

ThePPC have not taken anyone to court (yet), here's a link to some info so even if you lose at POPLA then just ignore.

Edit our posts have crossed but you seem to have got the idea for POPLA

Thanks so much for your reply. So do you think the above appeal to POPLA is fitting? The other thing I've come across recently is that tickets should be sticky to ensure they can be secured (which these ones weren't) so I may add a line in about this too. All of the legal/contract jargon in the above is copied from other posts and i'm a bit nervous about it as I don't want to use language that I don't entirely understand...

Thanks again.

[ostell]

There's no requirement for them to be sticky, makes sense if they were.

Don't worry about the legalese at the moment but if it gets to a court claim you must understand what you saying.