DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 31767--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: b789 Date: July 31, 2024, 2:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Obviously the landowner is the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of
Southwark. Who did you contact to try and get the PCN a
cancelled?
The “Confirmation of Appointment” is not a copy of the contract.
It is a document that you or I could reproduce on a whim. Did
you include something like this in your POPLA appeal:
[quote]The operator is also put to strict proof, by means of
contemporaneous and unredacted evidence, of a chain of authority
flowing from the landholder of the "relevant land" to the
operator. It is not accepted that the operator has adhered to
the landholder's definitions, exemptions, grace period, hours of
operation, etc. and any instructions to cancel charges due to
complaints. There is no evidence that the freeholder authorises
this operator to issue parking charges or what the land
enforcement boundary and start/expiry dates are, nor whether
this operator has standing to enforce such charges in their own
name rather than a bare licence to act as an agent ‘on behalf
of’ the landowner.
The operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the
BPA Code of Practice as this operator does not have proprietary
interest in the “relevant land” then I require that they produce
an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner.
The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting
out details including exemptions - such as any 'genuine
customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site
occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key
evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do and
any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact have
a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just
because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and
issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised
to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers
and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal
action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for
a landowner only). Witness statements are not sound evidence of
the above, often being pre-signed, generic documents not even
identifying the case in hand or even the site rules.
A witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but
in this case I
suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the
definition of the services provided by each party to the
agreement. Nor would it define vital information such as
charging days/times, any exemption clauses, grace periods (which
I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in
the BPA CoP) and basic information such as the land boundary and
bays where enforcement applies/does not apply.
Not forgetting evidence of the various restrictions which the
landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and, of
course, how much the landowner
authorises this agent to charge (which cannot be assumed to be
the sum on a sign
because template private parking terms and sums have been known
not to match
the actual landowner agreement). Paragraph 7 of the BPA Code of
Practice defines
the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict
proof of full
compliance:
7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any
outstanding parking
charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority
of the
landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being
taken.
7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:
(a) the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that
the
boundaries of the land can be clearly defined
(b) any conditions or restrictions on parking control and
enforcement
operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation
(c) any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that
may, or may
not, be subject to parking control and enforcement
(d) who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining
signs
(e) the definition of the services provided by each party to the
agreement[/quote]
Point this out in your response to the operator.
What about the photos that have obviously been altered that have
different “added” timestamps? Was that raised in the original
appeal? Highlight it in your operator response.
#Post#: 31798--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: Keeper Date: August 1, 2024, 2:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
My POPLA appeal was virtually word for word the version in one
of your posts, see my final pdf here
HTML https://jmp.sh/gf9VgIWb
I got in touch with the Residents association who put me in
touch with the Church who put me in touch with the Parish Priest
of the particular church who told me that I should appeal to
Creative. I will also have a look to see if there's anyone I can
speak to at the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Southwark - I did
not realise this was the landowner till I saw the contract.
The document at the end of the pdf in previous post has the
details of the Parish Priest redacted BY ME - it didn't feel
fair to share his name / details online but then again, these
are probably public anyway.
No comment on evidence tampering.
When you say 'operator response' it is just a 10,000 character
space to provide comments on what has been uploaded by Civil
Enforcement - presumably there's no additional opportunity for
me to add further arguments?
#Post#: 31801--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: DWMB2 Date: August 1, 2024, 3:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Keeper link=topic=2323.msg31798#msg31798
date=1722498572]
presumably there's no additional opportunity for me to add
further arguments?
[/quote]
You cannot use this space to raise additional points of appeal,
those should have been made in your POPLA appeal. This space is
used to draw attention to any parts of their evidence pack that
support your case, any points they have failed to address, etc.
#Post#: 31803--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: b789 Date: August 1, 2024, 3:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So they haven’t produced an unredacted copy of the contract. The
“Confirmation of Appointment” document is not a copy of a
contract and appears to be something thrown together and is
unsigned. It does not show any contract flowing from the
landowner through their agent to the operator.
Highlight this in your response and point out that anyone could
have put that together.
Whatever POPLA decides makes no difference. You won’t be paying
these scammers.
#Post#: 32361--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: Keeper Date: August 5, 2024, 5:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
How's this for a response?
I am writing to provide comments on the response submitted by
Civil Enforcement Ltd (CEL) regarding my appeal against the
parking charge issued on 4th June 2024. I maintain that the
Parking Charge Notice (PCN) should be cancelled for the reasons
outlined below:
Confirmation of Appointment is Not a Contract:
The "Confirmation of Appointment" provided by CEL does not
constitute a valid contract. It fails to demonstrate CEL's
authority to issue and enforce parking charges at Sacred Heart
Church Wimbledon. CEL must provide a full, contemporaneous, and
unredacted copy of their contract with the landowner, including
specifics such as the definition of the land, restrictions on
parking control and enforcement operations, and the duration of
their authority. The provided document lacks these details and
does not comply with BPA Code of Practice, Section 7.
Evidence Tampering and Inaccurate Photographic Evidence:
CEL's photographic evidence shows different timestamps,
indicating potential tampering. The BPA Code of Practice
(Section 21.5a) states that photographic evidence must not be
altered except for GDPR compliance or to enhance the image of
the VRM for clarity. The presence of two different timestamps
suggests that the images were altered after they were taken,
breaching the BPA Code of Practice and undermining the
credibility of CEL's evidence.
Inadequate Signage:
Visibility and Legibility: The signage at Sacred Heart Church
Wimbledon is not sufficiently prominent or clear. My photographs
show that the signs are hard to read, especially in low light
conditions, and are not visible from a distance.
Clear and Prominent Charges: CEL's signage fails to meet the
standard set by ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67. The £100
charge is buried within a lot of text, reducing its visibility
and the likelihood that a driver would notice and understand the
charge upon entering the car park.
Conclusion:
Given the inadequate signage, the lack of a valid contractual
agreement between CEL and the landowner, and the evidence
tampering, I respectfully request that POPLA upholds my appeal
and cancels the parking charge issued by Civil Enforcement Ltd.
Thank you for considering my comments.
#Post#: 32431--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: Keeper Date: August 6, 2024, 9:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Bumping as I think I need to submit this by tomorrow or latest
Thursday.
Is there anything that anyone thinks I should add or shall I
submit as above?
#Post#: 32437--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: b789 Date: August 6, 2024, 9:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As long as you point out in your response, any of your original
points that have not been rebutted or answered, it will be good
to go. Did you highlight the doctored photos? Simply mentioning
them is not enough.
#Post#: 32443--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: Keeper Date: August 6, 2024, 9:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It's just a comment box - can't upload or attach anything so
mentioning is the best I can do...
On the landowner front I spoke to the Archdiocese who confirmed
that the Parish Priest should be able to do this so I have no
idea why he was reluctant. A further email may be in order...
#Post#: 32448--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: b789 Date: August 6, 2024, 10:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Keeper link=topic=2323.msg32443#msg32443
date=1722955839]
It's just a comment box - can't upload or attach anything so
mentioning is the best I can do...
[/quote]
I meant did you highlight the doctored photos in your original
appeal? If you didn't, you must try and describe what is
obviously an alteration of the evidential photo which is in
breach of the CoP.
It may need painting out to the local priest that the landowner
is jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agents.
Maybe there's a religious metaphor that can be used. :o
#Post#: 32451--------------------------------------------------
Re: Civil Enforcement - No permit - Sacred Heart Church Wimbledo
n
By: DWMB2 Date: August 6, 2024, 10:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=b789 link=topic=2323.msg32448#msg32448
date=1722958103]
Maybe there's a religious metaphor that can be used. :o
[/quote]
"He who is without sin can cast the first Parking Charge Notice"
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page