URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 27056--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carpark charge before 5pm
   DIR By: Swahmad
       Date: June 21, 2024, 5:43 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
       >
       > Some suggestions. First, instead of 'Dear sirs', start with
       the POPLA verification code and vehicle registration mark, like
       in the example I shared.
       >
       > Also, as I noted in an early reply, I'm on the fence about
       whether to include point #3 (about the ambiguous signage) at
       this stage. Part of me thinks it would be better to leave this
       out - once you've submitted your appeal, ParkingEye have an
       opportunity to respond with an 'evidence pack', and you in turn
       have an opportunity to respond to their evidence pack. you could
       see if they try to argue that parking is not permitted outside
       the tariff times, then, if they do, you respond with point #3.
       The other part of me thinks get it on the table now, and head
       them off before they even try it. See if others take a view,
       although the more I think about it the more I'm leaning towards
       including it.
       >
       > When submitting, as in the example I shared, don't write your
       appeal in the online POPLA form, attach it as a PDF document so
       you can keep the formatting and the image of the sign.
       >
       > I've tried to make it flow slightly better, but this might
       just be a personal style thing so it's up to you:
       >
       > [indent]POPLA Verification Code: ________
       > VRM: ________
       >
       > I am appealing this parking charge notice in my capacity as
       the registered keeper. I am appealing on the grounds that the
       driver did not breach any of the terms of parking as advertised
       by the signage on the site.
       >
       > The signage at the site (a copy of which is included below)
       states that tariffs apply between 5pm-8am Monday-Friday, & all
       day Saturday and Sunday.
       >
       > [INCLUDE PHOTO OF SIGNAGE HERE INLINE]
       >
       > ParkingEye issued a parking charge for "either not purchasing
       the appropriate parking time or remaining at the car park for
       longer than permitted, in accordance with the terms and
       conditions set out in the signage".
       >
       > I contend that the driver did not do either of these things,
       and that as such, the terms and conditions were not breached,
       meaning this appeal should be upheld. My appeal is based on the
       following 3 grounds
       >
       > 1. The driver did not park during the times when tariffs
       apply, thus no payment was required - The signage at the site
       states that tariffs apply between 5pm-8am Monday-Friday, & all
       day Saturday and Sunday. If parking is offered to the general
       public at all hours and on all days, then there is no ambiguity
       about these terms which can only be interpreted as meaning that,
       as regards whether parking is subject to payment of a tariff,
       parking is chargeable between 5pm and 8am Monday to Friday; from
       5pm to midnight on Fridays; and all hours Saturday and Sunday.
       It therefore follows that parking is not subject to the payment
       of a tariff outside of these times. As the vehicle was  parked
       on a Friday at 9.05am and left at 1.27pm the same day, no tariff
       was due, so the first limb of ParkingEye's allegation, that the
       driver did not purchase the appropriate parking time, is without
       merit.
       >
       > 2.The car park is not subject to a maximum stay period, thus
       the driver did not remain for longer than permitted - The second
       limb of the creditor's allegation is that the vehicle 'remained
       at the car park for longer than permitted'. However, the full
       terms have been reproduced above (and can be seen in the
       attached photo) and the assessor will notice that the landowner
       has not applied any maximum parking period on motorists. It
       therefore follows that this limb of the creditor's allegation,
       that the vehicle remained at the car park for longer than
       permitted, is also without merit.
       >
       > 3. If ParkingEye contend that parking is not permitted outside
       of the times when tariffs apply, this term is not adequately
       communicated - It is not implied by the signage that parking
       outside the hours of 5pm-8am for the general public is not
       permitted. If ParkingEye had meant for this, then it should be
       clearly stated. If ParkingEye wish to argue that this is the
       intended interpretation of the signage, then that term is at
       best ambiguous, and as such, Section 69 of the Consumer Rights
       Act (2015) should apply:
       >
       > [indent]"If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer
       notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most
       favourable to the consumer is to prevail."[/indent]
       >
       > [i]In this case, the meaning that is most favourable to the
       consumer is the one that means parking outside of the times
       stated is allowed without the payment of a tariff, and thus no
       breach has occurred.
       >
       > In addition, if the intended meaning is that parking is not
       permitted outside of the times when tariffs apply, the signage
       is not compliant with section 19.3 of the BPA's Code of
       Practice, which states that "Signs must be conspicuous and
       legible, and written in intelligible language, so that they are
       easy to see, read and understand". A sign containing such
       ambiguous terms would clearly fail to meet this requirement.
       >
       > As the driver did not fail to purchase the appropriate parking
       time (as no tariff was due), nor did they remain at the car park
       for longer than permitted, I contend that the charge is not owed
       and the appeal should be upheld.[/indent]
       > [/i]
       --- End Quote ---
       Thank you. I have submitted this as the appeal.
       #Post#: 27384--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carpark charge before 5pm
   DIR By: Swahmad
       Date: June 24, 2024, 11:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thank you everyone. Notice number 3 has been cancelled and the
       notice number which I had submitted a popla appeal for been
       withdrawn so I didn't even have to wait for a popla decision.
       Whilst I'm really happy, the sign hasn't changed and so I can
       see others making the same mistake and ending up paying. Who can
       I write to for them to change the sign? My MP?
       #Post#: 27386--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carpark charge before 5pm
   DIR By: slapdash
       Date: June 24, 2024, 12:25 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It's such a poorly regulated industry.
       Local news, facebook groups, local WhatsApp groups and so on.
       They have no incentive to change until people start challenging
       all the erroneous tickets and it costs them in time and popla
       fees.
       #Post#: 27397--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carpark charge before 5pm
   DIR By: DWMB2
       Date: June 24, 2024, 1:59 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You might not have much luck with your MP at the moment given
       the pending election!
       If you want to make a fuss, local news can often be a good place
       to start, they're sometimes fairly desperate for local stories.
       St Helens Star would be the first that comes to my mind, as they
       also have a free print edition delivered locally.
       Either way, a good result, well done for your determination.
       #Post#: 27398--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Carpark charge before 5pm
   DIR By: Swahmad
       Date: June 24, 2024, 2:27 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
       >
       > You might not have much luck with your MP at the moment given
       the pending election!
       >
       > If you want to make a fuss, local news can often be a good
       place to start, they're sometimes fairly desperate for local
       stories. St Helens Star would be the first that comes to my
       mind, as they also have a free print edition delivered locally.
       >
       > Either way, a good result, well done for your determination.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Thank you! Feel quite chuffed but definitely want to get.the
       sign changed. Alternatively I could keep parking there and keep
       appealing  ;D
       *****************************************************
       Page 6 of 6
   DIR Previous Page