DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 12039--------------------------------------------------
POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: sugarray
Date: December 7, 2023, 7:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi gang
I had a pcn from group nexus for using a shopping car park. We
went to the machine and it said to pay £1 so we did. The pcn
states that i under paid and want £100 They're crazy. Anyway I
appealed then went to Popla as I thought it was a cut and dry
case. They rejected the appeal. I provided evidence that i paid.
What is this about now/
#Post#: 12041--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: slapdash
Date: December 7, 2023, 7:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.ftla.uk/private-parking-tickets/read-this-first-private-parking-charges-forum-guide/
Also what is the evidence of payment and it was, until the story
is provided, "the driver" who did things.
Ultimately with a popla rejection it is a waiting game to see if
they sue in the next 6 years
#Post#: 13604--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: sugarray
Date: January 11, 2024, 10:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ya-jYBYfLewKmiSqX2Pzf64158gvEw_0/view?usp=drive_link
Received the letter from the parking company they've added £60
to the fine. a-holes! Which the best wat foreard please?
#Post#: 13605--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: January 11, 2024, 10:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: sugarray link ---
>
> Which the best wat foreard please?
>
--- End Quote ---
As Slapdash noted above, the ball is now in their court, and
it's a case of waiting to see if they take the matter to court.
The £60 is likely an attempt at double recovery, which you would
be able to challenge.
We still don't have any information from you on which to base
any advice - we'd need to see:
- The original Parking Charge Notice
- Photos of the signage at the site
- Details of the payment procedure (do you input your reg? Do
you display a ticket? Do you have proof of payment? etc.)
If you haven't already, you could try speaking to whoever owns
the car park to see if they'll intervene.
#Post#: 13847--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: sugarray
Date: January 16, 2024, 9:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks I cant find the original letter or rejection atm I have
the decision from the popla website which i printed. Please see
below:
Decision
Unsuccessful
Assessor Name
RXXXXXd BXXXXn
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator has issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as
sufficient payment was not made.
Assessor summary of your case
The appellant advises that they paid the amount requested by the
machine. They have provided a screen shot from their bank
account. The appellant has repeated parts of their appeal within
their comments.
Assessor supporting rational for decision
When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the parking operator
has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver
has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the
car park. The operator’s list of payments shows that while a
payment was made the driver did not enter their full and correct
vehicle registration. As such the machine would not have been
able to suggest the correct tariff. The appellant evidence shows
that a payment was made but if they compared this to the tariffs
on site they would have been able to tell that their payment was
insufficient to cover the length of time which they were parked.
The signs required the driver to make a valid payment using
their full and correct vehicle registration or a parking charge
of £100 will be issued. After considering the evidence from both
parties, the driver did not pay for their stay and therefore did
not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. As such, I
am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I
must refuse the appeal.
#Post#: 13885--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: sugarray
Date: January 17, 2024, 10:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I found the original pcn
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hwwjU1taJj13ug0Z_qezfPE-WK-OWaOl/view?usp=sharing
HTML https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vO_8phODwERtRo_RyjoycW5jHyz0CgGk/view?usp=sharing
Please let me know if its worth pursuing. Thanks
#Post#: 13927--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: Nosy Parker
Date: January 18, 2024, 3:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's up to Highview/Nexus, not you, to decide whether it's worth
pursuing. If they want to make you pay, they will need to sue
you in the County Court and win the case.
The document you linked is not the original PCN. It is a
reminder and refers to an original PCN dated 25 July 2023. So
we still don't know anything about the original PCN. The
original PCN should have been included in the evidence submitted
by Highview/Nexus to POPLA. If you show us that, we can provide
more detailed advice. In the meantime, we do know how Group
Nexus cases usually play out after POPLA refuses an appeal. If
you have the patience and tenacity to play the game properly,
you should eventually win without paying anything. You can
choose to pay £60 now for a quiet life or play the long game and
most likely pay nothing.
You will receive a stream of increasingly shrill demands for
payment, first from the parking company and then from debt
collectors, all of which you can safely ignore. These will add
an extra (bogus) charge of £70 and make empty threats about
court action, CCJ etc. You can safely ignore these however
scary they seem. Eventually, you will receive a letter from
solicitors or Highview/Nexus itself which will call itself a
"letter of claim", "letter before claim" "letter before action"
or something similar giving you 30 days warning of impending
court action. This will enclose a form asking for personal
financial information. You don't need to reply to this letter
or complete the forms. Court action will follow either way, but
if you reply towards the end of the 30 days saying "I dispute
this alleged debt but I am anyway taking debt advice" they must
wait another 30 days before starting proceedings.
Proceedings are started by the court office named Civil National
Business Centre (CNBC) sending you a claim form. Provided you
fight the claim following the guidance over on
HTML https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822/newbies-private-parking-ticket-old-or-new-read-these-faqs-first-thankyou/p1<br
/>you should defeat the claim.
In the meantime, you must ensure that Highview/Nexus is kept
informed of your current address if you ever move to an address
that is different from the one to which they sent the PCN. If
you don't do that, you risk getting a CCJ because CNBC will send
the claim to your old address. To notify a change of address,
send the following email (attaching proof of your new address
such as an updated V5C vehicle registration certificate or
utility bill) to dpo@groupnexus.co.uk
Dear Sirs,
PCN [ ] VEHICLE [ ]
I dispute this charge and intend to defend any claim initiated
in relation to it.
Please note that I no longer reside at the address shown on the
PCN and correspondence sent to me there will not reach me. I
require you to erase my former address from your records. My
new address is [ ] and I attach proof
thereof.
Yours faithfully,
You must repeat the exercise every time you move house in the
next six years.
#Post#: 13975--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: January 18, 2024, 3:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As I understand it, your evidence is that the driver paid for 1
hour.
The vehicle was on site for more than 2 hours.
What's the defence?
You posted: We went to the machine and it said to pay £1 so we
did
How so, the car park operated on a pay for your stay in advance
basis, not pay on exit, therefore the machine didn't know when
the vehicle would be leaving.
From now on there are the fundamentals of the alleged breach and
procedural matters.
I don't see what defence there is against the alleged breach.
Can you help?
And can you help with POPLA's ramblings about registration
numbers? Your evidence is that payment was made for 1 hour -
until 10.**- when in reality the vehicle was on site for over 2
hours.
What the hell has registration numbers got to do with matters?
#Post#: 14010--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: sugarray
Date: January 19, 2024, 9:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello again, sorry been unwell and not been able to focus.
This is how the events transpired; my mum was driving the car.
She went to the shopping area and when she was leaving she went
to the machine and put in her vrn. The machine came up with £1
so she was there less than two hours. It seems that by the time
she got to the cr and loaded up, then left the car park it must
have gone over the two hour mark. She said the car park was busy
with cars and people and took some time to get out. 8 minutes is
the questionable time here. So for 8 mins they want to charge my
mum who is 74 £90 originally and now £160. What a world we live
in.
#Post#: 14016--------------------------------------------------
Re: POPLA rejected appeal
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: January 19, 2024, 12:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The machine came up with £1 so she was there less than two
hours. It seems that by the time she got to the cr and loaded
up, then left the car park it must have gone over the two hour
mark.
OP, in the absence of photographic evidence, I'm working on
this:
HTML https://edmontongreencentre.co.uk/car-park/
If this is wrong, pl let us know. Even better, take your own
photos.
The tariff:
Up to 1 hour: £1
1-2 hours: £2.
You're suggesting that she tipped into the 1-2 hour slot.
But this is not the evidence which shows the car was there for
over 2 hours. Your argument only holds is she took over an hour
to load and leave after payment.
And as for POPLA's 'The operator’s list of payments shows that
while a payment was made the driver did not enter their full and
correct vehicle registration. As such the machine would not have
been able to suggest the correct tariff. The appellant evidence
shows that a payment was made but if they compared this to the
tariffs on site they would have been able to tell that their
payment was insufficient to cover the length of time which they
were parked. The signs required the driver to make a valid
payment using their full and correct vehicle registration'.
I cannot make sense of this case unless you can show how payment
works. For example, common practice in my area is for a camera
to record the VRM on entry and for this to be entered by the
driver on leaving. But unless a correct i.e. matching VRM is
entered then NO tariff is demanded because there's no way this
can be calculated. In simple terms:
A chalk entered and a cheese wants to leave...how much should be
charged?
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page