DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 33152--------------------------------------------------
Re: Premier Park - Not parked within Bay - Arena Shopping Park
Coventry
DIR By: Supasta
Date: August 12, 2024, 3:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So You would agree with the appeal point put forward by HC
Andersen in that case or do you have a different view point?
Thanks again to everyone thats helping.
--- Quote from: DWMB2 link ---
>
> [quote]To do it vice-versa risks you missing the contractor's
appeals deadline while you wait for a reply from Tesco
--- End Quote ---
Only if they let the appeal deadline pass. My personal view is
that contacting Tesco first is wise. If they intervene, no need
to faff about with Premier.
I think I disagree with b789's suggested appeal here. Where one
has a meritoious point about the actual alleged breach (ie how
marginal it is), my view is this should be front and centre.
Technical appeal points have their place, but where there's a
strong reason the charge shouldn't have been issued at all, this
should be raised.
[/quote]
#Post#: 33154--------------------------------------------------
Re: Premier Park - Not parked within Bay - Arena Shopping Park
Coventry
DIR By: H C Andersen
Date: August 12, 2024, 3:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, in answer to your question.
Template nonsense IMO. It's of another time and era.
Why ALL in capitals? Does it carry any more meaning or have any
more effect? No, of course not.
Have the operators read it all before? Of course.
Vague template! If there's a vague template around, it's not the
creditor's. It states clearly: Not parked wholly within a
bay.(although there's a debate to be had about the meaning of
'within', particularly in the context of its regulatory
interpretation on-street)
Predatory behaviour! They're an approved operator under the BPA
Code of Practice, the BPA being an Accredited Trade Association.
They'll have a contract to manage parking.
But these oh-so-enticing apparently silver bullet templates
presented with such bravura are still on the internet.
#Post#: 33176--------------------------------------------------
Re: Premier Park - Not parked within Bay - Arena Shopping Park
Coventry
DIR By: b789
Date: August 12, 2024, 7:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
POPLA is more likely than not going to reject the appeal. No big
deal. Let them try to take it to court where the only truly
independent arbiter, a judge would decide whether the keeper
owes a debt.
Do whatever you feel is best for POPLA. You know my advice. Take
it or leave it. It’s just a speculative novice. You try to get
the landowner or their agent to cancel it. You appeal to the
operator, for what it’s worth and they will reject it no matter
how wordy or how much effort you put into it. You appeal to
POPLA and argue as many points of law and CoP as you can and if
they agree, it’s a win. If they don’t, no big deal. You move on
the the ultimate dispute resolution service where they may or
may not try to pursue the keeper.
To date I have a 100% success rate. You can worry about the
content and what the POPLA assessors have for breakfast. It
really doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. As my
district judge family member has told me, “some of those forum
members are really anal about it”.
Just prepare for the possibility that eventually, you may need
to defend a claim in the small claims track of the county court.
Or, you may not.
#Post#: 33189--------------------------------------------------
Re: Premier Park - Not parked within Bay - Arena Shopping Park
Coventry
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: August 13, 2024, 3:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
OP, I'm not against you raising the PoFA point that b789 raises.
I'm just of the view that you should also mention the issue of
de-minimis (worded so as not to identify the driver).
If it were to get to court, and your defence raised this point,
a judge might reasonably wonder why you didn't seek to raise it
with the parking company at an earlier stage...
#Post#: 33191--------------------------------------------------
Re: Premier Park - Not parked within Bay - Arena Shopping Park
Coventry
DIR By: b789
Date: August 13, 2024, 3:38 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Whilst I don't disagree with the point being made, we all know
that the operator will not consider de minimis and neither will
POPLA. Mitigation does not come into it.
If it ever does go as far as court claim, then of course it will
be raised and that's assuming it ever got as far as a hearing.
However, expecting a de minimis argument to even be considered
by the operator or POPLA is a fantasy.
#Post#: 33247--------------------------------------------------
Re: Premier Park - Not parked within Bay - Arena Shopping Park
Coventry
DIR By: Supasta
Date: August 13, 2024, 10:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you all for the advice.
I have just had an email from the Arena Shopping Management who
have got the PCN cancelled for me. Im glad to not have to bang
my head against this but its such a shame as to how easily they
will try and rip of the ordinary motorist.
#Post#: 33248--------------------------------------------------
Re: Premier Park - Not parked within Bay - Arena Shopping Park
Coventry
DIR By: b789
Date: August 13, 2024, 10:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Plan A strikes again. Well done.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page