DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 24132--------------------------------------------------
Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: May 27, 2024, 3:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi there,
The driver of this car attempted to pay after staying in a Euro
car park but when they inputted the registration it said they
had only just arrived. There was no way of speaking to anyone or
calling anyone to address this so they paid the amount
requested. A photo of the car parks terms and conditions was
also taken to make it clear that payment was to be made upon
exiting the car park. They also kept a pdf receipt of this
payment as they wanted to make sure there was proof that an
attempt to pay for the parking was made. 2 weeks later they
received a letter to say their payment did not cover the
duration. As the owner of the car, I made an appeal to Euro Car
Parks stating all of this but it was rejected, even though their
correspondents ignored the fact that their machines incorrectly
read the time of the vehicle when parking payment was made. I
would massively appreciate it if someone could take a look
through the evidence I have provided and let me know if it's
worth my time to go through POPLA to make a formal appeal.
A huge thank you in advance to anyone who has taken the time to
read through this.
Harmony guru
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 24213--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Dave65
Date: May 28, 2024, 4:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Can we see the back of the PPN?
#Post#: 24215--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: May 28, 2024, 4:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Dave65 link ---
>
> Can we see the back of the PPN?
>
--- End Quote ---
Not sure if this what you meant but here's the back of the
Parking Charge Notice
[attachment deleted by admin]
#Post#: 24233--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: May 28, 2024, 6:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
What exactly did you put in your original appeal? Did you reveal
the keeper to also be the driver? Have you complained about this
charge to the business you were visiting or patronising at the
time? If it is a retail park, have you tried to find out who the
managing agent or landowner is and ask them to get this
speculative invoice for £100, issued in error and unfairly by
their agent, cancelled?
Your Plan C will be an appeal to POPLA where, hopefully, this
will get cancelled as it appears to have been issued incorrectly
and you have evidence to show that. There are also failures in
their NtK that should prevent them from transferring the
liability from the (hopefully) unknown driver to the the keeper
due to no invitation to the keeper to pay the charge as required
by the strict provisions of PoFA 9(2)(e)(i)
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted.
There are other BPA CoP breaches that can be included in your
POPLA appeal such as poor signage and lack of prominence of the
charge for breaching the terms.
#Post#: 24235--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: May 28, 2024, 6:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> What exactly did you put in your original appeal? Did you
reveal the keeper to also be the driver? Have you complained
about this charge to the business you were visiting or
patronising at the time? If it is a retail park, have you tried
to find out who the managing agent or landowner is and ask them
to get this speculative invoice for £100, issued in error and
unfairly by their agent, cancelled?
>
> Your Plan C will be an appeal to POPLA where, hopefully, this
will get cancelled as it appears to have been issued incorrectly
and you have evidence to show that. There are also failures in
their NtK that should prevent them from transferring the
liability from the (hopefully) unknown driver to the the keeper
due to no invitation to the keeper to pay the charge as required
by the strict provisions of PoFA 9(2)(e)(i)
HTML https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted.
>
> There are other BPA CoP breaches that can be included in your
POPLA appeal such as poor signage and lack of prominence of the
charge for breaching the terms.
>
--- End Quote ---
I do not have a copy as it was sent via Euro Car Parks website,
I made this appeal the same day I received the letter. In this
appeal, I did identify myself as the driver. I originally only
sent this appeal with a bank statement and later realised I had
an invoice for the receipt of the transaction afterwards and
sent this is a follow-up email with the below statement:
As stated in my first correspondence, I stated that your
facility incorrectly recorded my entry as the time I entered my
registration forcing me to have to pay the minimum fee. I have
attached payment receipt as proof of this. Please note the time
your system claims that I arrived which is contradictory to the
alleged time in your letter. I have also attached an image of
the terms and conditions of your carpark taken on the evening of
the alleged incident. As you can clearly see it states that for
customers to 'pay for your parking at the end of your stay
before leaving the car park'. I followed these terms as stated
so the fault is down to a fault in your system.
There was no confirmation from Euro Car Parks that they received
this information or the evidence attached.
This was Five Ways Birmingham car park which is not park of a
retail park as far as I am aware. There is a casino that can be
entered via the car park but I cannot confirm the two are
affiliated. I used this car park for a business (Symphony Hall)
not affiliated with the car park.
Could you please explain more what is meant by the below
statement in your message:
"There are also failures in their NtK that should prevent them
from transferring the liability from the (hopefully) unknown
driver to the the keeper due to no invitation to the keeper to
pay the charge"
Thanks
#Post#: 24239--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: May 28, 2024, 7:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Harmonyguru link ---
>
> Could you please explain more what is meant by the below
statement in your message:
>
> "There are also failures in their NtK that should prevent them
from transferring the liability from the (hopefully) unknown
driver to the the keeper due to no invitation to the keeper to
pay the charge"
>
--- End Quote ---
Unfortunately, if you admitted to being the driver, you have
blown that appeal/defence point out of the water.
The driver is always liable for any charge. EPC have no idea who
the driver is. If they want to be able to transfer that
liability from the unknown driver to the known keeper, they have
to use wording as required by the Protection of Freedoms Act
2012 (PoFA). They have not included an invitation for the keeper
to pay the charge. This is specifically required as per PoFA
9(2)(e)(i). As that requirement is missing, the NtK is not fully
compliant with the requirements of PoFA and they cannot transfer
liability from the driver to the keeper. However, as you have
identified yourself as the driver, even though there is no legal
obligation to do so, you are therefore liable.
Did you receive a POPLA code in your appeal rejection letter?
The is your next step. Whilst it says the POPLA code is only
valid for 28 days, it is actually valid for 32 days. Show us
what you plan to put in your POPLA appeal and we'll go from
there.
#Post#: 24242--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: May 28, 2024, 7:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for at least trying with an option before going to
POPLA. I have been given a POPLa code from rejected appeal. I
plan to state in my appeal that I tried to pay the correct
amount but was unable to do so due to an error on their
ticketing machine. There was also no way to contact anyone at
the time this happened as their number only allows an option to
pay a parking fine, not to actually discuss any errors or
concerns. I plan to quote section 15.7 in some way referencing
that the driver has paid fully for the parking (of which the
ticket machine charged), complied with all other conditions of
parking as stated in their signage and received a parking charge
due to a reasonable genuine error. Is there anything else I
should make clear?
#Post#: 24246--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: May 28, 2024, 7:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Harmonyguru link ---
>
> I plan to quote section 15.7 in some way referencing that the
driver has paid fully for the parking (of which the ticket
machine charged), complied with all other conditions of parking
as stated in their signage and received a parking charge due to
a reasonable genuine error. Is there anything else I should make
clear?
>
--- End Quote ---
What is "section 15.7"?
POPLA will only consider breaches of the BPA CoP or errors in
law by the operator. Mitigation does not enter into it. You must
lead the assessor by the nose to anything that you intend to
rely on as part of your appeal. You also must include as many
arguments as possible in a POPLA appeal. The operator has to
rebut all your arguments. You only need to win on a single
point. So, the kitchen sink is thrown in at a POPLA Appel.
Besides the fact that their system failed and they have issued
the PCN incorrectly, you will also need to include things
inadequate/poor signage (always a valid POPLA point regarding
ECP), no evidence of landowner authority and so on. Before you
send anything, show us here and we'll critique it for you.
#Post#: 24251--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: andy_foster
Date: May 28, 2024, 8:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I would include that variously the PPC is in breach of an
implied term of the contract (that the machine will accept the
required payment) and trying to hold you liable for their
failure and/or that the contract was frustrated by the failure
of their machine.
#Post#: 24252--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: May 28, 2024, 8:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> [quote author=Harmonyguru link=topic=2034.msg24242#msg24242
date=1716899413]
> I plan to quote section 15.7 in some way referencing that the
driver has paid fully for the parking (of which the ticket
machine charged), complied with all other conditions of parking
as stated in their signage and received a parking charge due to
a reasonable genuine error. Is there anything else I should make
clear?
>
--- End Quote ---
What is "section 15.7"?
[/quote]
I had seen this quoted in another forum but now I'm beginning to
think I may be mistaken.
How should I word these appeals? I am happy to give as many
arguments as possible. Do I need photographic evidence of 'no
evidence of landowner authority'? Is my evidence already posted
suitable evidence for 'inadequate/poor signage'. Is it worth
noting that Google reviews have also cited a similar issue with
parking? Would print screenshots of these reviews be useful as
evidence?
As my main argument is that their system failed, should I lead
with this argument? Do I address it as though it is to a single
person or a company?
Thanks
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 5
DIR Next Page