DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 20453--------------------------------------------------
PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: CT679
Date: April 24, 2024, 3:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,
1. My vehicle received a PCN - Pls see attached.
2. I appealed to PPS as follows:
"""Dear Private Parking Solutions (London) LTD (PPS),
I am the registered keeper of this vehicle and dealing with this
matter as such.
I would kindly ask you to please consider my appeal to this PCN
on the following grounds:
(a). On the day of this event, when the driver parked at this
location, parked directly next to them was a uniformed security
operative, in a marked vehicle, who was patrolling Royal
Victoria Docks. The driver asked the operative to clarify the
parking rules at this location. The operative told the driver
that parking restrictions were not being applied on that day due
to there being no operative at work that day to monitor the
parked vehicles. The operative told the driver they could
therefore park in that location for as long as they wanted
without fear of penalty.
(b). PPS has not adhered to / complied with the Protection of
Freedom Act 2012 Schedule 4 Recovery of Unpaid Parking Charges
(POFA 2012) on the following points:
- Failed to provide the Invitation To Keeper in the format
prescribed by POFA 9 (2) (e)
- Failed to provide Notice to Keeper (NtK) liability as
prescribed by section 9 (2) (f)
- Failed to provide the required period of parking 9 (2) (a)
As PPS's actions are not POFA 2012 compliant, PPS can't transfer
liability from the driver to the registered keeper, or, worse,
as in this case, threaten to extort money to which PPS has
absolutely no entitlement to from the keeper.
(c). The location of this alleged contravention is a dock area.
PPS have
- Failed to provide the Landowner Authority Contract between
Private Parking Solutions (London) LTD and the landowner
(d). As this is a dock area, this location is covered by bylaws,
whereby only the driver is liable. You cannot, therefore,
transfer liability for the alleged charge from the driver at the
time to me, the registered keeper.
(e). PPS has failed to provide the required signs to designate
this as a 'red route'. Furthermore, on the photographs you
provide in your PCN, there are no distinguishable 'red route
lines' at this location.
(f). It is clear from your photographs that this alleged
contravention occurred on a dark, wet night. Hence both road
markings and parking signage would have been extremely difficult
to see - as your camera evidence (un)clearly shows.
(g). The signage in the car park is of a “forbidding” nature. It
is limited to vehicles displaying a valid permit only and
therefore the terms cannot apply to vehicles without a permit
because the signage does not offer an invitation to park on
certain terms. The terms are forbidding. This means that there
was never a contractual relationship. I refer you to the
following case law: PCM-UK v Bull et all B4GF26K6 [2016], UKPC v
Masterson B4GF26K6[2016], Horizon Parking v Mr J C5GF17X2 [2016]
– In all three of these cases the signage was found to be
forbidding and thus only a trespass had occurred and would be a
matter for the landowner.
Based on the above grounds I would be grateful if you would
accept this appeal and cancel this PCN. Alternatively, please
issue a POPLA code, so that I may appeal to POPLA. """"
3. PPS have denied my appeal and provided a POPLA code - Pls see
attached
I would be extremely grateful if anyone could share advice on
what I should write in my appeal to POPLA, please.
Thank You very much....
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 20476--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: April 24, 2024, 5:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In general, a POPLA appeal expands on the grounds you outlined
in your initial appeal, albeit in more detail. The general
advice is to assume no prior knowledge on the part of the POPLA
assessor, and walk them through each of your points clearly and
in detail, leaving as little room for
misinterpretation/disagreement as possible.
A couple of them would benefit from another look/clarification:
--- Quote from: CT679 link ---
>
> - Failed to provide the required period of parking 9 (2) (a)
>
--- End Quote ---
The notice you've uploaded does seem to specify a period of
parking
--- Quote from: CT679 link ---
>
> - Failed to provide the Landowner Authority Contract between
Private Parking Solutions (London) LTD and the landowner
--- End Quote ---
There's no obligation for them to at the point they issue the
original PCN, although you can put them to proof at POPLA.
--- Quote from: CT679 link ---
>
> (d). As this is a dock area, this location is covered by
bylaws, whereby only the driver is liable. You cannot,
therefore, transfer liability for the alleged charge from the
driver at the time to me, the registered keeper.
--- End Quote ---
If you haven't already, be sure to check the byelaws to make
sure the area where the car was parked is indeed within the area
covered by the byelaws. Assuming it is, you may wish to include
a copy of the boundary map to demonstrate this point to the
assessor. Page 30 would appear to contain a map of the
boundaries covered by the byelaws:
HTML https://londonsroyaldocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Bye_laws_London_Docklands.pdf
HTML https://londonsroyaldocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Bye_laws_London_Docklands.pdf
--- Quote from: CT679 link ---
>
> (e). PPS has failed to provide the required signs to
designate this as a 'red route'. Furthermore, on the photographs
you provide in your PCN, there are no distinguishable 'red route
lines' at this location.
--- End Quote ---
The allegation from PPS is that the driver exceeded the maximum
stay period, it doesn't seem to mention anything about a red
route?
--- Quote from: CT679 link ---
>
> (f). It is clear from your photographs that this alleged
contravention occurred on a dark, wet night. Hence both road
markings and parking signage would have been extremely difficult
to see - as your camera evidence (un)clearly shows.
--- End Quote ---
The notice suggests the vehicle was parked between 16:52 and
17:23 on 10th March - sunset in London on that day was at around
6pm, so I'm not sure you can accurately say that it was a "dark
night" when the vehicle was parked. The photos appear to show
the vehicle parked directly underneath a sign detailing the
terms and conditions. If you intend to argue poor
signage/markings, you'll need to get your own photos to back
this up.
--- Quote from: CT679 link ---
>
> (g). The signage in the car park is of a “forbidding” nature.
It is limited to vehicles displaying a valid permit only and
therefore the terms cannot apply to vehicles without a permit
because the signage does not offer an invitation to park on
certain terms.
--- End Quote ---
POPLA won't go for this point, but if the signage is forbidding
you can still include this. However, in their rejection, PPS say
their signs state:
[indent]FREE SHORT STAY PARKING
MAX STAY 20 MINUTES, NO RETURN WITHIN 2 HOURS[/indent]
That doesn't make any mention of permits? If the signage has
different wording to what they claim, you should get some photos
to demonstrate this.
#Post#: 20484--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: chamchi
Date: April 24, 2024, 6:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Wow, I wish my replies were this detailed
#Post#: 20763--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: WhoLetTheScamsOut
Date: April 27, 2024, 9:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Probably worth noting the location mentioned on the notice is
completely different to the actual parking location. Notice says
1 western gateway e16 1xl and the actual parking spot is near 20
western gateway e16 1bs 0.3miles difference in location roughly.
1 western gateway is more of the actual excel centre and the
nearest parking signs to that is about red route stopping (2
western gateway). Not sure if this is helpful but thought it’s
worth mentioning
#Post#: 20780--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: April 27, 2024, 11:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If they've failed to adequately specify the location then this
can be raised as a potential PoFA fail. Based on some recent
cases we've seen there's a fair chance the assessor will not
agree, but worth adding into the mix.
#Post#: 21195--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: CT679
Date: May 1, 2024, 6:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,,
Thank you ever so much for your advice. I will put together a
POPLA appeal letter tomorrow and post if here before I submit
it.
Many Thanks
#Post#: 24550--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: CT679
Date: May 31, 2024, 6:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi All,
I sent in an appeal to POPLA - pls see attached.
Private Parking Solutions have sent in their evidence against my
appeal - pls see attached.
I would be very grateful for your advice on how best to respond
to the evidence.
I have 5 days left in which to respond.
Thank you as always for your help
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 25241--------------------------------------------------
Re: PCN from PPS @ Royal Victoria Dock, E16 1XL
DIR By: WhoLetTheScamsOut
Date: June 7, 2024, 2:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Any update OP??? Looks like this thread was buried oops
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1