Euro car park

[des8]

I'll get pointers out for your PoPLA appeal tomorrow

[SweetRita22]

Awesome

[des8]

The first point to remember is not to identify the driver.
When completing the PoPLA form make sure you don't tick a box indicating you might be the driver.

Explain that your appeal is made as the keeper and not the driver and you have visited the site following receipt of the Parking Charge to check the position

I would be highlighting the notice which boldly states "NO PARKING"
There may be other signs present which contradict that particular sign, but having seen the large bold instruction the driver was under no obligation to search for other signs. If there is confusion the signs must be read "contra proferentem"
If parking is not permitted, one cannot contract to park there.
The PCN states the charge is for "rernaining at the car park without authorisation",
To remain within the area "without authorisation" and in contravention of a "NO PARKING" instruction means the driver was trespassing.
A Parking Charge is the consideration made in a contract to park. There was no contract for the reasons stated above.
The remedy for the tort of trespass is damages, which can only be sought by the land occupier, not a management company

My second argument would be around the failure of the parking charge notice to comply with PoFA 2012 Sch 4 section 9 (2) (e).
The act mandates that the notice "state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;"
The notice does not invite the keeper to so act, but only threatens that if .... ". lf you do not provide the correct address for service of the driver, pass the notice on to the driver, we will pursue you for any Parking Charge amount that remains outstanding."
They may have the right (as per PoFA2012 Sch 4 9 (2) (f) but only if they comply strictly with the requirements of PoFA 2012.Sch 4 9 ((2) (e)
As they have not complied with the statute they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the driver to the keeper

My third argument would be around the number of differing signs that need to be read to try and understand the position, and the difficulty in reading them due to their poor colour mix and small font.
I think I counted eight different signs (including the pay machine).
You will need to go and measure the font size of all lettering!

Good luck

[SweetRita22]

WOW that's incredible. Thank you very much for all of the above. I will definitely get my head around that tomorrow and do everything you say and as you advise. I would like to send you our appeal in advance of submission. I hope that is ok with you. We will visit the site again in the next day or so and measure the font sizes as suggested. We still haven't found the terms and conditions? Unless it's the tiny red writing on one of the signs?
speak soon. Thank you. S

[SweetRita22]

Hi,

I have now now prepared a draft for my POPLA appeal.

On the appeal form I thought I would tick:
section 2: 'Vehicle not parked where stated on PCN'
terms and conditions not properly signed'
section 6 'Other'

I have labelled the evidence 1 to 6 for clarity but will not upload '3' here as it is the PCN itself which has already been uploaded.
1. is the no parking sign
2. is the blue fencing with no parking signs
4. is the red lettering size
5. is the blue lettering size
There are 2 PDF's attached which are the appeal draft itself and ECP's photo of their own signage.


Thank you again for your time and advice. POPLA appeal.docx 6.pdf

[des8]

I would suggest your introductory paragraphs are amended.
I found it difficult to understand the position, so would suggest something along the lines of:

I am the registered keeper of vehicle make & model reg number abc123.
The vehicle is registered as a ‘disabled’ vehicle and is registered with Cornwall Council car parking scheme for Blue Badge holders.
The vehicle is driven by a number of different drivers specifically for the benefit of a blue badge holder whose conditions include hypoglycaemia, which can be counteracted by eating/ sugar intake if an ‘episode’ occurs, and impaired vision.

I received the NTK number xxxx on the 25^th of January 2024,
I was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged parking incident.
I spoke to (both the driver and ?) the blue badge holder who was a passenger in the vehicle at the time to ascertain the details of the alleged incident
Subsequently, I visited the site of the alleged offence to further clarify the position

Having ascertained the facts my appeal against the Parking Charge is as follows:

In your first paragraph you say that the staff of Green Parrot gave permission for the vehicle to park, but at the same time
you argue the car was parked without authorisation. And "At no time was the car ‘parked’ at the Green Parrot and permission from the company was obtained to ‘wait’ there." What's the difference between "parking" & "waiting"?

I think the PopLA adjudicator might find that contradictory, so would be inclined to omit the section about the staff giving permission (especially as they might not admit to doing so)

At the end of Para 3 you need to say that because of their poor quality the signs are incapable of forming a contract, even if one was to ignore the NO PARKING instruction.

[SweetRita22]

Thank you again for your time and so much information.
We really did struggle to get it right, quite a few times, and decided that version was the best we could do without further help. We tried to include your suggestions and advice but definitely do need to go back to the drawing board tomorrow. Watch this space, we will be back thanks you so very much.

[SweetRita22]

Thank you again for your invaluable help.

We have altered the wording to match your advice and feel much happier with the way it now reads.

Hopefully, apart from adding private information, it is now more suitable for submitting to POPLA.

POPLA appeal.docx

[des8]

Good luck

[SweetRita22]

Hi, so it's all good now? It's definitely Ok to submit? we are very nervous!
Thank you

[des8]

It's the best I can do

[SweetRita22]

Well we really really appreciate your help and will definitely let you know how it went

[SweetRita22]

Hi,

We have now received the POPLA 'evidence' that Eurocarparks have submitted and we have seven days to respond to POPLA.
Their evidence is a horribly long document (28 pages), however, I feel that the arguments you provided us with still stand.

1. They have ignored the fact that there are 'no parking signs' therefore our argument hasn't changed.

2. Page 6 of their evidence states that their PCN is BPA approved. Page 13 states that 'fig 3' confirms that the NTK is POFA compliant. Page 17 shows the BPA approved/ POFA compliant PCN/NTK. The wording in this approved document is not the the wording they used in their PCN/NTK that they sent to us and shows that your advice on not complying with PoFA 2012 Sch 4 section 9 (2) (e) is correct.

3. Their own photos display the poor signage/ small lettering further confirming the third argument around poor signage.

We wondered if you might have a response to this for us? (We have attached the document in two halves due to the size of the original file).
Thank you very much for your time and expertise. S.


1 ECP evidence to POPLA pers info removed.pdf 2 ECP evidence to POPLA pers info removed.pdf

[des8]

Ok so now you need to double down on your arguments.
For example show how the signage does not accord with BPA Operators Code of Practice (https://www.britishparking.co.uk/wri...n91.2.2024.pdf)
Sec 27 recommends following Dept of Transport guidance (https://assets.publishing.service.go...chapter-03.pdf)
and sec 27.9 of BPA code might be especially relevant

Somewhere in their defence they mention that the PCN they issue has been passed by BPA and IPC and Gladstones solicitors.
I would point out that those are not the opinions of uninterested third parties as they are trade associations of parking companies and that firm of solicitors is very much connected (https://www.parkingcowboys.co.uk/gladstones-solicitors/)
And in any event the PCN does not comply with the statutory requirements or with the BPA wording, as you point out.

Just don't give up!

[SweetRita22]

Awesome, many thanks I will send that off to POPLA tomorrow and send you a copy for your perusal.
speak soon
S