DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 28900--------------------------------------------------
UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: Boxxer
Date: July 7, 2024, 4:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I was at Inflata Nation to pick up the child after a birthday
party last Sunday just before 12pm. All the parking spaces were
occupied at the time with the parents so I have stopped at a
empty space for 5mins just to get my child out. Then I've
received the NTK yesterday.
Any chances I can fight with this one. Much appreciate any help
in advance.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/PFDXCSS/IMG-5891.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/PFDXCSS
HTML https://i.ibb.co/vVJ2LQ2/car1.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/vVJ2LQ2
HTML https://i.ibb.co/P1Ws0zd/car3.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/P1Ws0zd
HTML https://i.ibb.co/q7jHvy9/car2.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/q7jHvy9
#Post#: 28913--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: b789
Date: July 7, 2024, 6:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If you're happy to fight this, it is 99% sure to end up being a
discontinuation. There is a chance that it could be cancelled at
POPLA stage but even if it isn't, UKPC will not put it in front
of a judge if it is robustly defended.
There is a technical flaw in the NtK in that there is no
"period" of parking mentioned as required if they intend to rely
on PoFA to hold the keeper liable. PoFA 9(2)(a) States that the
notice must specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it
was parked and the period of parking to which the notice
relates. It doesn't.
Also, the photos have had the time stamp added after the fact.
This can be seen in the photo on the NtK has no time stamp but
the same photo on file does. Either that or they have cropped
(altered) the photo in the NtK. That is a breach of the BPA Code
of Practice (CoP) section 21.5a(b). Photographic evidence must
not be used as the basis for issuing a parking charge unless the
images bear an accurate time and date stamp applied at the point
the picture was taken.
Additionally, it says: "You must not digitally or by other means
alter images used as photographic evidence other than:
[indent]e) to blur faces or the VRMs of other vehicles in the
image in accordance with your GDPR obligations; or
f) to enhance the image of the VRM for clarity, but not to alter
the letters and numbers displayed.[/indent]
It is obvious that they have either added the time stamp after
the fact or edited the photo on the NtK. Both those facts are
breaches of the BPA CoP and mean that the PCN has not been
issued correctly.
POPLA will not consider any mitigation. It will only consider
breach of law or the BPA CoP. The NtK does not fully comply with
the requirements of PoFA (the law) and UKPC have breached their
own ATA CoP. In POPLA appeal 2413353469, assessor Gayle Stanton
allowed the appeal and stated the following:
[indent]"I have reviewed the copy of the NTK provided by the
operator and I am not satisfied that the images of the vehicle
number plate on the NTK are compliant with Section 21.5a of the
BPA Code of Practice.
These images are not date stamped and after seeing the full
images in the case file they appear to have been digitally
altered or cropped to fit on the NTK. This is especially
apparent on the colour image on the NTK."[/indent]
UKPC signs are notoriously bad and consistently fail to
adequately notify the driver of the charge. Their signs are
cluttered and poorly worded. That alone has often been a winner
at POPLA and of the very few that ever get as far as a hearing
in front of a judge, are won on the fact that their signs fail
to make a contract between UKPC and the driver. One more reason
why they really don't want this to get in front of a judge as
they have often been spanked over this issue.
There are other points but more than enough to be getting on
with. You won't be paying a penny to UKPC and there is no danger
of a CCJ. You may have to weather some nasty sounding debt
collector letters but they can be safely ignored. Debt
collectors are not a party to the contract allegedly breached by
the driver with UKPC. Use their letters as kindling or line the
bottom of cat litter tray.
Have you tried Plan A yet? That is asking the landowner/managing
agent to get this cancelled? Plan B is to appeal to UKPC but it
is most probable that they will reject, no matter what. No money
in it for them if they accept appeals.
POPLA will be the next stage but a rejection at POPLA has no
bearing on any further outcome. If it ever got as far as a court
claim and it actually went as far as a hearing, a truly
independent arbiter, a judge, would be able to see al the
failures.
So, Plan A first. If that doesn't work, on or before 30th July
appeal to UKPC with the following:
[indent]I appeal as the registered keeper. I am not obliged to
identify the driver and decline to do so. You cannot transfer
the driver’s liability (if any) to me as you have not served me
with a notice to keeper that fully complies with all the
requirements of Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act
2012 (PoFA) and it is now too late to do so. In particular
(without limitation) your notice does not contain the wording
required by PoFA paragraph 9(2)(a).
Additionally, the photos you have provided as evidence on the
NtK have been altered or cropped and differ from the file photos
in that there is no timestamp or it has been cropped (altered).
This is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) section
21.5a.
There is no evidence that the driver was allowed a consideration
period. Your photos show that your operative decided that 9
seconds was sufficient time for them to record any alleged
breach of contract. There is persuasive law that says
loading/unloading a vehicle (that includes goods or passengers)
is not parking.
I require you to cancel the parking charge and remove my
personal information from your database or, if not, then issue
me with a POPLA code where I will evidence your failures to
issue the PCN correctly.[/indent]
#Post#: 29244--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: Boxxer
Date: July 9, 2024, 8:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks b789 for your reply. I have tried to contact Inflata
Nation but they've said they are not responsible for any parking
issue, so think I will go ahead with plan B and appeal to UKPC.
After a closer inspection on the photo on the NtK, there is
actually a time stamp at the very right hand bottom corner. But
because its a portrait photo that has been squashed to fit into
a landscape box, can I still argue the photo have been altered?
HTML https://i.ibb.co/mq9JGYG/Screenshot-2024-07-09-at-13-41-38.png
HTML https://ibb.co/mq9JGYG
#Post#: 29255--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: b789
Date: July 9, 2024, 9:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Isn't that photo evidence of the image having been cropped? UKPC
are going to reject any appeal but you heed to go through the
motions in order to get a POPLA code. I wouldn't waste much
energy on the Plan B appeal.
When it comes to POPLA, a bit more effort can be used but again,
there are no guarantees with POPLA as, ultimately, they are
protecting their members interests and it has no bearing on any
subsequent court claim. As already advised, defending a UKPC/DCB
Legal issued claim using the robust template defence will lead,
ultimately to a discontinuation.
The only problem is that it is a protracted process. They try to
wear their victims down. As long as you are confident that you
are right and you are prepared to take our advice and fight it,
you will be OK.
#Post#: 29480--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: Boxxer
Date: July 11, 2024, 5:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the explanation. Yes I believed its unfair for me
just to stop for a few minutes for loading a passenger and I am
prepared to fight it to the end. I am going to send the appeal
to UKPC with what you have suggested earlier.
--- Quote ---
> I appeal as the registered keeper. I am not obliged to
identify the driver and decline to do so. You cannot transfer
the driver’s liability (if any) to me as you have not served me
with a notice to keeper that fully complies with all the
requirements of Schedule 4 to the Protection of Freedoms Act
2012 (PoFA) and it is now too late to do so. In particular
(without limitation) your notice does not contain the wording
required by PoFA paragraph 9(2)(a).
>
> Additionally, the photos you have provided as evidence on the
NtK have been altered or cropped and differ from the file photos
in that there is no timestamp or it has been cropped (altered).
This is a breach of the BPA Code of Practice (CoP) section
21.5a.
>
> There is no evidence that the driver was allowed a
consideration period. Your photos show that your operative
decided that 9 seconds was sufficient time for them to record
any alleged breach of contract. There is persuasive law that
says loading/unloading a vehicle (that includes goods or
passengers) is not parking.
>
> I require you to cancel the parking charge and remove my
personal information from your database or, if not, then issue
me with a POPLA code where I will evidence your failures to
issue the PCN correctly.
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 35130--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: Boxxer
Date: August 31, 2024, 6:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
So I have received the rejected letter and the POPLA Reference a
couple days ago.
Looking at a list of the points that I can appeal on:
1. no evidence that the driver was allowed a consideration
period nor period of parking / stopping
2. PoFA failures to hold the keeper liable
3. No evidence to show that the person named is the driver
Not sure how strong is it as the point about the (landscape)
image provided as evidence on the NtK has been altered from the
file (portrait) photos. The timestamp was always there and
wasn't added afterward but was squashed at the very bottom. And
there is a sign located on the pole behind the car by the side.
Is there any other point I should add to the above?
HTML https://i.ibb.co/w0tn0fn/ukpc.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/w0tn0fn
HTML https://i.ibb.co/71H4KZS/sign.jpg
HTML https://ibb.co/fxbvHyX
#Post#: 35147--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: b789
Date: August 31, 2024, 8:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Leave the BPA CoP breach of section 21.5a in. The photo has been
“altered” from the file photo. It is still a point that the
operator has to refute.
You always have the signage. UKPC signs never conform to their
CoP requirements. Many POPLA appeals have been won on inadequate
and poor UKPC signs.
Is the £100 charge “adequately” brought to the attention of the
motorist? Are the terms of parking clear? Are the signs
prominent and easily read.
Simply compare a UKPC sign with the one in the Beavis case and
do Google search for “Lord Dennings Red Hand Rule”. We don’t
have close up of a UKPC sign at the location but as you will see
below, all UKPC signs are of a similar poor standard.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/09jE7BN.jpeg
You will also argue no landholder authority to issue PCNs at the
location.
#Post#: 35153--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: Boxxer
Date: August 31, 2024, 8:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the quick reply. Here is their updated sign and it is
a bit more prominent now.
I will write something up with these points and post it up here
soon.
HTML https://i.ibb.co/QpQW4bn/car2.jpg
#Post#: 35160--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: b789
Date: August 31, 2024, 10:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
That does not appear to be the same as the sign you mention that
can be seen in one of the photos.
HTML https://i.imgur.com/eh6IV5p.png
#Post#: 35177--------------------------------------------------
Re: UKPC - Not parked correctly within the markings - Colindale
Retail Park, London
DIR By: Boxxer
Date: August 31, 2024, 3:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I screen grabbed the image of the sign on the pole on google map
which is a few years old now. Sorry for the confusion.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page