**SUCCESS** Parking Charge

[damowhite]

Hello.

I need some help trying to appeal with this parking charge.

I've never had a parking charge before and I've researched online and it seems as though as everyone is "ignoring" these kind of letters but.. I'm tempted to just pay as they've sent a letter.

Advice would be great.

Thanks.

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Charge

Do you have the original pcn and your appeal that i can see please ?

M1

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

Sure.

Here's the appeal.

I drove to Tunstall on the 19th knowingly I had no change to pay for parking as I planned to obtain change after a quick purchase which was the reason why I parked close to the store Argos, after paying for my product at 11:02 I came outside to apply a ticket to my vehicle to find a parking charge applied to my windscreen. I find this absolutely disgusting, I had been away from my vehicle for less than 5 minutes which is not unreasonable to obtain change as I have previously taken 10 minutes to purchase a ticket before in busier cities, I demand that you retract the ridiculous charge of thirty pounds for being away from my vehicle for less than 5 minutes to obtain a ticket.
I have had a close friend who has also been charged by your aggressive ticketing though luckily for you they have paid their "penalty" out of panic though I will not be "scared" by the unlawfully charge.

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Charge

Personally i'd appeal to popla.

If you want me to construct an appeal for you just let me know.

M1

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

If you could construct one for me that would be great.

I don't think I'm very good at appealing... :|

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Charge

Ok i've added you to the list http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...udsman-appeals

I'm keeping all appeals to the last minute at the moment, just as a precaution, due to recent changes so it'll be mid November :okay:

M1

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

Great, thanks M1!

Didn't think there'd be any hope after I appealed...

Cheers!

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

Hey [MENTION=5354]mystery1[/MENTION] just wondering when you'll type an appeal?

My due date is tomorrow so I'm feeling a little anxious as you can imagine.

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Charge

After work today :okay:

Just after teatime.

M1

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

Thank you! :marchmellow:

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Charge

damowhitepopla.rtf

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...a-process.html shows how to lodge the appeal quite well. You may need to change to PDF.

M1

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

Thanks @mystery1I'll let you know how it goes

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

Yikes... They've replied with this. @mystery1

On the 19/09/2015 the vehicle with registration REMOVED was witnessed by an attendant operating on behalf of Smart Parking Ltd parked in breach of the terms and conditions of MATALAN TUNSTALL which are clearly signposted within said car park. The Appellant has attached a PDF documented in their appeal to POPLA. We have acknowledge the Appellants comments and we address them as follows: The BPA Code of Practice October 2014 states, paragraph 34.4 states drivers must be given advance notice of all parking charges before they enter into the contract for parking services. There are signs at the entrance of the car park that clearly state the terms and conditions and there are an additional 34 signs situated around the car park that advice of the terms and conditions. The BPA Code of Practice October 2014, paragraph 18.3 states Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what your terms and conditions are, including your parking charges. You must place signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site. We can confirm there are signs at the entrance of the car park that clearly state the terms and conditions. There are an additional 11 signs situated around the car park that advise of the terms and conditions. It is clearly stated on the signage visible to all motorists “A Parking Charge Notice of £90 may be issued in the following circumstances: No valid ticket, Failure to pay for parking”. Therefore the Appellant failed to comply with the terms and conditions and breached the contract and ultimately the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly. BPA Code of Practise 8.3 Specific parking-terms signage tells drivers what the terms and conditions are, including the parking charges. The signs containing the specific parking terms throughout the site, so that drivers are given the chance to read them at the time of parking or leaving their vehicle. Signs are conspicuous and legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see, read and understand. Signs showing the detailed terms and conditions must be at least 450mm x 450mm. which smart parking limited signs are. There is no ambiguous language or jargon on any of the Smart Parking signs at this site. By entering, parking or otherwise remaining in the private car park, you are agreeing to comply with the terms and conditions of that site. It is clearly states on the signage “Display ticket in windscreen and detach refund voucher”. As the Appellants vehicle was parked without a valid ticket displayed, this confirms the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly. With regards to the amount of the charge, we refer to the case ParkingEye vs Beavis where, on the 4th November 2015, the Supreme Court handed down Judgment. This further appeal lodged by the Defendant was heard over the course of three days during July 2015 and the majority decision reached by the Supreme Court, dismisses Mr Beavis’ appeal on both grounds. In reaching this decision, Lord Neuberger, Lord Sumption, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Carnwath and Lord Hodge (Lord Toulson dissenting) found that the Parking Charge levied by ParkingEye was neither ‘unfair’, nor ‘penal’, and concluded that ParkingEye had a legitimate interest in charging overstaying motorists. The Supreme Court also agreed with the analysis of the amount of the Charge previously proffered by both HHJ Moloney and the Court of Appeal, finding that the sum of £85 was neither ‘extravagant, nor unconscionable’, as well determining that the amount of the Parking Charge was reasonable. In the Appellants case it is clearly stated on the signs “A Parking Charge of £90 may be issued in the following circumstances: No valid ticket, Failure to pay for parking”. As the Appellant failed to comply with the terms and conditions and breached the contract, the Appellant therefore incurred the Parking Charge Notice correctly. Furthermore the Appellant has failed to provide any evidence to reinforce why the overstayed and breached the terms and conditions. A full copy of the Supreme Court Judgment can be found here: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/do...0-judgment.pdf We would like to clarify the Appellants points raised are a generic statement used in appeals by motorists appealing Parking Charge Notices. Furthermore it is the responsibility of the driver of the vehicle to ensure they purchase and correctly display a valid ticket for the correct amount of time when using this car park. As the Appellant has failed to do this, they have therefore breached the advertised terms and conditions and we have no option but to uphold the Parking Charge Notice. We would like to confirm the Appellant has failed to provide any evidence or reasoning for failing to adhere to the terms and conditions and failing to pay and display. By entering, Parking or otherwise remaining on the private car park, you are agreeing to comply with the terms and conditions of that site. As the Appellant failed to adhere to the terms and conditions, this reaffirms the Parking Charge Notice was issued correctly and accordingly. It is the responsibility of the Motorist upon entering the site to ensure that they have read and fully understand the terms and conditions of that site before using the car parking facilities. The Parking attendant has witnessed the above vehicle parked in breach with no valid ticket displayed, please see the photographic evidence to reinforce this. Therefore the Appellant incurred the Parking Charge Notice correctly. The car park in question is private land and the owners allow access to the public on condition that they park according to the advertised terms and conditions, the signs warn that non-compliance may result in a parking charge notice. Persons entering the car park are, in effect, agreeing to the terms and conditions and if they park in breach of the terms and conditions the landowner has a right to make a charge. As the Appellant has entered this car park they have agreed to the terms and conditions of the car park therefore the Appellant needs to comply with the terms and conditions. The Terms and conditions of the car park are requested by our Client and Smart Parking Ltd as agent enforces these. In the light above and evidence enclosed Smart Parking Ltd have decided to uphold the PCN.

[mystery1]

Re: Parking Charge

They haven't countered the grace period/going to get change angle nor have they, from what you have posted, put forward any evidence of a contract to operate on the land in question.

Is there a contract or witness statement ?

M1

[damowhite]

Re: Parking Charge

There's a comment box under what they have sent.

Shall I just re-word what you have wrote above in this comment box?