DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 25187--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: June 7, 2024, 5:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Anything that you are relying on to try and invoke no keeper
liability due to non-compliance with PoFA is not going to work
because the driver is already identified.
The fact that the address on the NtK does not match the location
where the alleged breach of contract occurred should be argued
on the basis of a breach of the ATA CoP that the PPC belongs to.
#Post#: 25194--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: June 7, 2024, 6:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> Anything that you are relying on to try and invoke no keeper
liability due to non-compliance with PoFA is not going to work
because the driver is already identified.
>
> The fact that the address on the NtK does not match the
location where the alleged breach of contract occurred should be
argued on the basis of a breach of the ATA CoP that the PPC
belongs to.
>
--- End Quote ---
I cannot find anything on ATA CoP. If Euro Car Parks are a
member of the British Parking Associations Approved Operators
Scheme (AOS) then can I just reference the BPA CoP, specifically
clause 21.12 relating to POFA 9(2)(a)?
#Post#: 25202--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: June 7, 2024, 7:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You cannot rely on PoFA if you have identified yourself to be
the driver. If the driver is known, PoFA is irrelevant (at this
stage).
If this ever got to court, you could rely on PoFA 4(5) because
the claim would be for more than the original £100 which is an
abuse of process. However, we are nowhere near that stage, if
ever.
#Post#: 25204--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: June 7, 2024, 7:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, a quick skip through relevant law.
You posted: 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.
So, the NTK is now redundant as far as being a statutory notice
but not as regards conveying the particulars of the creditor's
claim for which there is no prescribed format as regards a claim
against a driver for breach of contract.
Why?
Because a NTK is a creation of Schedule 4 to the Protection of
Freedoms Act 2012 whose sole objective is to regulate how
creditors may kick into touch the centuries-old legal principle
that only the parties to a contract have rights and
responsibilities under that contract by allowing the creditor to
hold the keeper/hirer liable for breaches in lieu.
You do not fall into this category - because you have identified
yourself as the liable party to the contract(AKA the driver)
therefore it is a straightforward issue of whether the driver is
liable to pay a parking charge to the creditor for breaching the
terms of contract by which they were deemed bound by entering
and parking on this private land. It is a matter pure and simple
of contract law and POPLA's remit.
Of course there is common ground between PoFA and contract law,
there's bound to be. But don't be fooled into thinking that
aspects which are common fall to be considered under PoFA, they
don't.
So, what were the terms of the contract into which you entered,
was there a breach etc? These are the issues for POPLA.
But why POPLA you may ask if PoFA doesn't apply?
Because members of the BPA's AOS have signed up to this and the
Code of Practice by virtue of their membership.
And as regards bp's assertion that the level of charge is an
abuse of process, IMO this is not correct as each case turns on
its own facts. However, it could be argued to be but IMO the
issue at large is what additional charges if any could a
creditor add to their claim while simply pursuing the driver for
a breach of contract...the answer to which would require a
detailed examination of the terms of that specific contract e.g.
their clarity, fairness etc.
Is my view.
#Post#: 26393--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: June 17, 2024, 4:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Harmonyguru link ---
>
> Okay, here it is. A link to my appeal. I apologise in advance
to [member=26]b789[/member] for choosing to keep in the 'no
invitation to the keeper'. I just felt like if there was any
chance something might get missed or the slightest chance POPLA
still see it as noteworthy it would be worth keeping. Plus with
the ambiguity of the address it helps to bolster this argument.
>
> Note I have NOT sent this. I am still waiting to hear from the
landowners in the hope I can have the charge removed.
>
>
> POPLA APPEAL DRAFT
HTML https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/pqub1yb25y2p12z0uixam/POPLA-APPEAL-2411454240-Edit.pdf?rlkey=4bg4dzuvbpnpgl4w480cu04xt&st=am6ccdsx&dl=0
>
> No such thing as bad criticism so don't be shy.
>
--- End Quote ---
I will fully scrap point 3 on the failures of the NtK. I spent
the last week hoping to contact the landowners to have the PCN
cancelled getting as far as speaking with the agency who
represent the landlord but sadly no luck. I know I am soon
approaching the deadline for my POPLA appeal and so I just
wanted to ask if upon reading my other points (particularly the
first one) that I have made my points clear enough? I really
want it be clear on the fault of their ANPR system so that the
PCN is fairly cancelled.
#Post#: 26401--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: June 17, 2024, 5:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Harmonyguru link ---
>
> I apologise in advance to [member=26]b789[/member] for
choosing to keep in the 'no invitation to the keeper'. I just
felt like if there was any chance something might get missed or
the slightest chance POPLA still see it as noteworthy it would
be worth keeping. Plus with the ambiguity of the address it
helps to bolster this argument.
>
--- End Quote ---
It is fairly obvious that you have not understood the point of
PoFA compliance. PoFA only applies IF the drivers identity is
unknown and remains so. You have already identified yourself to
have also been the driver.
Lack of PoFA compliance can only help you if the drivers
identity is unknown. The moment the drivers identity is
revealed, PoFA ceases to apply. The drivers identity has been
revealed by you. Therefore, what are you trying to achieve by
claiming PoFA failures? They don't need to comply at all as they
are not chasing you as the known keeper but as the known driver.
You can leave it is if you like but it will not help you in your
appeal.
#Post#: 26402--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: June 17, 2024, 5:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: b789 link ---
>
> [quote author=Harmonyguru link=topic=2034.msg26393#msg26393
date=1718617524]
> I apologise in advance to [member=26]b789[/member] for
choosing to keep in the 'no invitation to the keeper'. I just
felt like if there was any chance something might get missed or
the slightest chance POPLA still see it as noteworthy it would
be worth keeping. Plus with the ambiguity of the address it
helps to bolster this argument.
>
--- End Quote ---
It is fairly obvious that you have not understood the point of
PoFA compliance. PoFA only applies IF the drivers identity is
unknown and remains so. You have already identified yourself to
have also been the driver.
Lack of PoFA compliance can only help you if the drivers
identity is unknown. The moment the drivers identity is
revealed, PoFA ceases to apply. The drivers identity has been
revealed by you. Therefore, what are you trying to achieve by
claiming PoFA failures? They don't need to comply at all as they
are not chasing you as the known keeper but as the known driver.
You can leave it is if you like but it will not help you in your
appeal.
[/quote]
Yes you're right and the general consensus of everyone has been
to not include this. Thank you for patience. I wasn't well when
I posted this and I think I was just in a state of panic trying
to say as much as I could. My only priority now is just making
sure my first point is clear and worded in a way that gives me
the best chance of success.
#Post#: 26403--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: June 17, 2024, 5:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Even if it is not successful, it doesn't mean anything.
#Post#: 26405--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: Harmonyguru
Date: June 17, 2024, 5:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So I need to stop worrying?
#Post#: 26407--------------------------------------------------
Re: Euro Car Parks - Payment did not cover duration of stay but
machine wouldn't let the driver pay more
DIR By: b789
Date: June 17, 2024, 5:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Losing a POPLA appeal does not mean you have to pay the charge.
If you feel strongly enough then you can fight it all the way to
court, should it ever get that far. POPLA is not truly
independent as it is funded by the BPA members and so they are
looking out for their members interests at the end of the day.
A POPLA rejection has absolutely no bearing on any future claim,
should it ever get that far.
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 5
DIR Previous Page