MET Parking Services - won

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services

Hi M1,
I am just going through the POPLA process, however one thing that I have overlooked is the times between the 'alleged' offence and me being notified exceeds the 14 day period in the PCN. The 'alleged' offence took place on the 17-05-16 and I didn't receive notification until 09th June 2016. Surely this voids the PCN?

Regards

SE Blue.....

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services

Hi M1,
I want to thank you for the help you have provided so far..... It certainly helps and opens your eyes to the hurdles with this stuff!! I am just in the process of submitting my POPLA under 'I was not improperly parked' 'Other' and this is the appeal content -

'I did not receive the notice of this alleged offence within the 14 day period. It was received by my office on the 9th June 2016 and by me in the post on the 11th June 2016, the alleged offence took place on the 10th May 2016 - 31 days elapsed. Additionally, I would have been a paying customer at the site and clearly wasn't aware of the 'new' parking enforcement and time restriction. After discussing with the site management they advised me that if my stay was liable to exceed the 90 minute allowed they would have extended accordingly.'

Can you see anything wrong with this? It is factual and evidenced via the PCN. Is there anything you think would be helpful to add/highlight?

Regards

SE Blue

[mystery1]

Re: MET Parking Services

Hi M1,
I want to thank you for the help you have provided so far..... It certainly helps and opens your eyes to the hurdles with this stuff!! I am just in the process of submitting my POPLA under 'I was not improperly parked' 'Other' and this is the appeal content -

'I did not receive the notice of this alleged offence within the 14 day period. It was received by my office on the 9th June 2016 and by me in the post on the 11th June 2016, the alleged offence took place on the 10th May 2016 - 31 days elapsed. Additionally, I would have been a paying customer at the site and clearly wasn't aware of the 'new' parking enforcement and time restriction. After discussing with the site management they advised me that if my stay was liable to exceed the 90 minute allowed they would have extended accordingly.'

Can you see anything wrong with this? It is factual and evidenced via the PCN. Is there anything you think would be helpful to add/highlight?

Regards

SE Blue

Don't like it. Using terms like "i" gives away information about who the driver is/was and although the company is the one with the ticket, it still shouldn't be done.

Are you sure you didn't get a ticket on the vehicle ? 31 days sounds like it's being treated as you did as in such circumstances they have to wait 28 days before sending out a notice.

An example of a popla appeal is

ravidokipopla.rtf

M1

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services

Hi M1,
I'm out and about at the moment so forgive brief reply. You're spot on with 'I' I have changed to 'the company' There was no ticket left on the vehicle at the time. I will stop in at the site on my way back today and push them some more to get this ticket cancelled.. If not that will be the last they see from our company and expenditure. I will finish the POPLA when I get back this afternoon.

Thanks and regards

SE Blue

[mystery1]

Re: MET Parking Services

I think in attempting to move your post i have accidentally deleted it.

Can't remember what it said now.

M1

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services

M1,
I know how you feel! Ha ha...... I'll dig it out and resubmit....

SE Blue

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services

Here you go M1, I appreciate your advice on this before submitting: We (Company Name..) did not receive the notice of this alleged until 31 had elapsed. It was received by our office on the 9th June 2016. The alleged offence took place on the 10th May 2016. There was no notice left on our vehicle at the time of the alleged offence. Additionally, 'we' would have been paying customer(s) at the site and clearly weren't aware of the 'new' parking enforcement and time restriction. After discussing with the site management they advised me that if my stay was liable to exceed the 90 minute allowed they would have extended accordingly. Additionally it had been noted that the parking notices attached to the poles within the car park are at a height that makes the typeface unreadable due to the distance off the ground which is compounded in low light and poor weather conditions.'

Regards

SE Blue

[mystery1]

Re: MET Parking Services

Edit to suit.

sebluekpopla.rtf

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co...a-process.html

M1

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services

Submitted POPLA now we wait......

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services

Dear M1,
POPLA have been in touch and appeal upheld. Thanks for your help and advice

Regards

SE Blue

[mystery1]

Re: MET Parking Services - won

That was quick

Uncontested ?

M1

[SE Blue]

Re: MET Parking Services - won

Hi M1,
Completely uncontested, I was surprised at how quickly they replied. Must have been the evidence and statement I submitted (and more importantly - your help and advice)

Regards

SE Blue