DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 23160--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: May 20, 2024, 6:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Doesn’t it let you upload a pdf with your full appeal? If so,
just put “see uploaded PDF” in the text box.
Otherwise, what you have is ok. I wouldn’t put too much effort
into a Plan B appeal with this lot of scammers.
#Post#: 24912--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: June 4, 2024, 6:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I've got a response back from UKPC and they have rejected my
appeal
Attached is image of the first page of the letter and also pdf
document of the whole letter
Should I now appeal to POPLA ?
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 24914--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: June 4, 2024, 6:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It is not surprising that UKPC would reject your appeal. You
should appeal to POPLA and you have 32 days, not the 28 days
stated to respond. There is no advantage to delaying the POPLA
appeal but do make sure that you set it out properly.
POPLA will not consider any mitigation. They will only consider
breaches of the BPA CoP and other law. You have already
explained those breaches in your first appeal so they should
form the basis of your POPLA appeal.
Mention each breach and then expand on why and how they have
breached each point. Lead the POPLA assessor by the nose to each
point. Use simple language as though you are writing a Janet and
John book for early learners.
For example, you stated in your original appeal:"The signage in
the car park is inadequate and fails to comply with the strict
requirements as required under PoFA 2012 9(2)(c ) to adequately
bring to the attention of the driver the charge and the other
facts that made them payable. This is a breach of the BPA Code
of Practice (CoP) 19.4." Expand on why failure to "...adequately
bring to the attention of the driver the charge..." as required
under PoFA 9(2)(c ) is also a breach of the BPA CoP section
19.4.
You need to look at the BPA CoP and can do so here:
BPA Approved Operator Code of Practice v9
HTML https://www.britishparking.co.uk/code-of-practice-and-compliance-monitoring<br
/>and PoFA here:
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted
Once you have something please post it here so we can critique
it and adjust if necessary.
#Post#: 25023--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: June 5, 2024, 11:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Below is my initial draft. For the last paragraph is there any
rule I can quote that parking bays should be sufficiently wide
for safe parking ?
The relevant sign was positioned quite far up and surrounded by
bags of compost from local store therefore not easy to access
or read. Strangely the parking company did not provide
photograph of this particular sign ,the nearest and only one in
this car park section, but instead from different section of
the car park. Blocked access to the signage failed to comply
with terms of "BPA Approved Operator Code of Practice". Notably
on the two points below
- "Signs must be conspicuous and legible"
- "they are easy to see, read and understand."
Access to signage was inadequate and therefore failed to comply
with the strict requirements as required under PoFA 2012 9(2)(c)
to adequately bring to the attention of the driver the charge
and the other facts that made them payable. This is a breach of
the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) 19.4. I have attached a
photograph of the sign where access was blocked
Bay lines are worn and faded breaching the "Surface markings –
delineated parking bays" condition 19.11. Lack of clear
demarcation contributes significantly to the difficulty the
driver would have parking in a precise manner.
The driver did not park outside of the bay. The vehicle was
positioned on the line, not beyond it. Additionally, as
demonstrated in the photos, the neighbouring car was parked in a
similar manner which obviously necessitated that the driver park
as far to the right as possible to maintain a safe distance
between vehicles.
It is clear in this case the bays provided are not sufficiently
wide for safe parking, as illustrated in the photos. The
inadequate width of the bays makes it challenging for any driver
to park without encroaching on the lines.
#Post#: 25028--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: June 5, 2024, 11:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Do you have or can you get some photos of the signs that were
obscured?
What about considering some of these POPLA appeal points you
could use?
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 19.2 and Appendix B - Entrance signs
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 19.3 & 19.9 - Specific parking-terms
signage
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 20.3 - Charges, and terms and
conditions
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 22.4 - Use of photographic evidence
technology
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 7 - Written authorisation of the
landowner
No Registered Keeper liability
The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate
No planning permission from the Council for Pole-mounted ANPR
cameras and no advertising consent for signage
Pre-conviction penalties are unlawful in English law
Lack of standing
#Post#: 25029--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: June 5, 2024, 12:12 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I can't seem to upload the photo as it says the folder is full
but if you look at the image I uploaded on the 7th May in this
thread it shows the sign surrounded by bags of compost
#Post#: 25030--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: June 5, 2024, 12:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You'll need to use a third party site like Imgur to upload any
more images. Upload space on here is very limited.
#Post#: 25035--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: June 5, 2024, 12:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Ok but the image is uploaded in this thread on the 7th May. One
how the sign is surrounded by bags of compost and the other
shows the wording on the signage. I think I had to stand on the
bags to get close photo of the sign
In regard to the other suggested conditions
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 19.2 and Appendix B - Entrance signs
----- will need to check if there we entrance signs
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 19.3 & 19.9 - Specific parking-terms
signage
----- think there might be some mileage on 19.9 i.e. "there must
be at least one sign containing the
terms and conditions for parking that can be viewed without
needing to leave the vehicle". Can't recall seeing one does it
have to be in the same section of the car park ?
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 20.3 - Charges, and terms and
conditions
---- if you look at the sign it does specify the fine amount not
sure I can use this one
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 22.4 - Use of photographic evidence
technology
---- ANPR wasn't used just normal photos. Not sure on what point
I would argue a case on 22.4? It says must comply by Data
Protection, be registered with the Information Commissioner and
follow DVLA requirements for data. I don't have any evidence to
suggest that none of those are true
Non-compliance with BPA CoP 7 - Written authorisation of the
landowner
No Registered Keeper liability
Pre-conviction penalties are unlawful in English law
Lack of standing
----- Not sure if there is anything from the above I could make
a case I assume they must be authorised
#Post#: 25969--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: Jag84
Date: June 14, 2024, 6:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Apologies for delay in response unfortunately got laid off and
have been going through some personal challenges but now more
determined not to have to pay this fine
Below is what I plan to send to POPLA. Is that OK ? I assume
POPLA will allow me to upload photos and they have access to the
photos the parking company has taken ?
Appeal for Parking Fine to POPLA
Dear POPLA Adjudicator,
I am writing to appeal a parking fine issued to me for allegedly
parking outside of a designated bay. I believe the fine should
be overturned for the following reasons:
1. Inadequate Signage
1.1. Poor Visibility and Accessibility of Signs
The relevant signage was positioned too high and was surrounded
by bags of compost from a nearby store, making it difficult to
access or read. Notably, the parking company did not provide a
photograph of this particular sign, which was the nearest and
only one in this section of the car park. Instead, they provided
photographs from a different section. This is a violation of the
BPA Code of Practice, specifically:
Section 19.3: "Signs must be conspicuous and legible, and
written in intelligible language, so that they are easy to see,
read, and understand."
1.2. Non-Compliance with PoFA 2012 Section 9(2)(c)
The blocked access to the signage fails to comply with the
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Section 9(2)(c), which requires
that the terms of the parking charge be adequately brought to
the attention of the driver. This constitutes a breach of the
BPA Code of Practice (CoP) 19.1. I have attached a photograph
showing the sign with blocked access.
1.3. Non-Compliance with BPA CoP 19.9 - Specific Parking-Terms
Signage
According to BPA CoP 19.9, there must be at least one sign
containing the terms and conditions for parking that can be
viewed without needing to leave the vehicle. I did not see any
such sign meeting this requirement.
2. Poor Condition and Inadequate Width of Parking Bays
2.1. Worn and Faded Bay Lines
The bay lines in the car park are worn and faded, breaching the
condition stated in BPA CoP 19.11 regarding "Surface markings –
delineated parking bays." The lack of clear demarcation
significantly contributes to the difficulty a driver would have
in parking precisely within the bay.
2.2. Insufficient Bay Width
The bays provided are not sufficiently wide for safe parking.
According to the BPA Code of Practice, Section 28.3, parking
areas should be clearly marked and adequately spaced:
28.3: "You should lay out the parking area so that drivers can
at all times have a fair opportunity to park their vehicles and
meet the terms and conditions of parking."
The inadequate width of the bays, as illustrated in the attached
photographs, makes it challenging for any driver to park without
encroaching on the lines. This condition made it necessary for
me to park as far to the right as possible to maintain a safe
distance from the neighboring vehicle, which was also parked on
or near the line.
3. Vehicle Position
3.1. Accurate Positioning
The vehicle was not parked outside of the bay; it was positioned
on the line, not beyond it. The photographs demonstrate that the
neighboring car was parked in a similar manner, necessitating
that I park as far to the right as possible to maintain a safe
distance between the vehicles.
Based on the above points, I respectfully request that the
parking fine be overturned due to the inadequate signage, poor
condition of the bay lines, and the insufficient width of the
bays. These factors made it unreasonably difficult for me to
comply with the parking terms and conditions.
Thank you for considering my appeal.
#Post#: 25971--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC Fine for car not being in bay
DIR By: b789
Date: June 14, 2024, 6:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A PCN is not a “fine”. It is an invoice. The keeper/driver has
not committed any offence. This is a civil matter in contract
law. Please don’t call it a “fine”.
You should be sending the POPLA appeal as a PDF file. You can
embed images into a PDF file.
List your main points at the beginning and then go through each
point individually.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 4
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page