PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

LPS, POPLA Appeal fail
HolyNougat
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 18:38
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



Hello All.
So a car was parked in a LPS managed car park - it was dark, the signage did not comply with the regulations because it was at ground level and the only sign that could possibly have seen had a car parked in front of it. the driver was probably away from the car for five minutes.
The car was ticketed and appealed to POPLA using the fairly standard arguments, with some case specific ones thrown it but my appeal was declined.
I have been a little slapdash here because I appealed before receiving the NtK, however I have still not actually revealed who the driver was.
I've dealt with one of these before from PE that ended up with me settling for a few quid at mediation, so I suppose I'm happy to go down that route again if required, however my question probably is, how likely are LPS to take this to court? and additionally, should I just wait now for the NtK to arrive?
Thanks,
HN

This post has been edited by HolyNougat: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 08:10
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 18:38
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 18:53
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,124
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



Llawnroc Parking Services Ltd?
Local Parking Security Ltd?

Whichever, here's details of the number of times they've 'done court' in the 12 months period.

http://[Commercial link removed]/20...ml#comment-form

There's no NtK going to arrive now!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cabbyman
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 19:09
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,898
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
From: South of John O'Groats, north of Cape Town.
Member No.: 16,066



What 'fairly standard arguments' did you use at POPLA? huh.gif


--------------------
Cabbyman 11 PPCs 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HolyNougat
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 19:37
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



Well, I suppose they will just issue a court claim.
Anyway, It was Local Parking Security.
That link is not showing I think...
I suppose the question is should I now just cough up, or go to court and risk it?
I used the normal popla appeal points, GPEOL, contracts etc. including the issue about signage. I can't seem to actually find the appeal I lodged. Just had a one liner back saying:

'The operator submits that the appellant parked in the site without clearly
displaying a valid pay & display ticket and therefore breached the terms and
conditions of the site.
The appellant has submitted that the operator does not have the legal right
to pursue parking charge notices. In further submissions made by the
appellant, the appellant has submitted that the signage in the site was not
sufficient in communicating the terms and conditions.
The operator has submitted as evidence a Witness Statement indicating legal
authority to control the site. I therefore find that the operator does have a
legal right to pursue parking charge notices in on the land; I am therefor
unable to allow the appeal on this ground.
The appellant has submitted that the signage in the site was not sufficient; the
evidential burden of proof therefore shifts to the operator to prove on the
balance of probabilities that the signage in the site did adequately
communicate the terms and conditions of the site. The operator has
submitted as evidence a number of photographs taken of signs erected
throughout the site, in these photographs I am clearly able to see that signs
were erected throughout the site clearly stating that the site was a pay &
display car park. I therefore find that the signage in the site did adequately
communicate the terms and conditions.
The appellant parked without clearly displaying a valid pay & display ticket
and therefore breached the terms and conditions of the site, on this ground I
refuse the appeal. '
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dennis Basher
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 19:59
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 482
Joined: 13 Jan 2014
Member No.: 67,950



Out of interest, did LPS ever send you a copy of the evidence that they submitted to POPLA?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Umkomaas
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 20:02
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,124
Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Member No.: 59,842



QUOTE
Well, I suppose they will just issue a court claim.
Anyway, It was Local Parking Security.
That link is not showing I think...


Sorry, it was a link to the Parking Prankster's blog, where he lists court cases where PPCs have been involved. PePiPoo won't allow links to the PP. I keep forgetting!

Local Parking Security was involved in 30 cases - these are 'any' court case, it doesn't necessarily mean they were parking-related - but no way of ascertaining that AFAIAA.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hoohoo
post Tue, 28 Jul 2015 - 21:33
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,068
Joined: 18 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,768



As they have not supplied an NTK there is no keeper liability.

If they did not send you an evidence pack then you should complain to POPLA and ask to reopen the case. You usually need to do this several times. When they reopen the case add the appeal point that keeper liability does not apply as no NTK was supplied.

Edit you original post if there are any clues who the driver is.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HolyNougat
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 07:02
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



They did send me an 'evidence' pack at the same time they sent it to POPLA. Usual junk that hardly applied to the case in question at all - however, I did notice that my accountant was on the board of directors of the company that appointed LPS to 'manage' the land!
Anyway, this point about 'keeper liability' - they have never served NtK, as it happens I am not the keeper of this car... does the fact that I have appealed make any difference, can they still use PoFA to go after the keeper? - and no I've not identified the driver.

This post has been edited by HolyNougat: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 07:08
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hellfire8
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 07:29
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,783
Joined: 2 Apr 2014
From: Essex
Member No.: 69,831



Can you submit a copy of your Appeal (word for word) on here please as the assessors response has made no mention of GPEOL but you state this was included.

Can I see your original Appeal.

QUOTE (HolyNougat @ Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 08:02) *
They did send me an 'evidence' pack at the same time they sent it to POPLA. Usual junk that hardly applied to the case in question at all - however, I did notice that my accountant was on the board of directors of the company that appointed LPS to 'manage' the land!
Anyway, this point about 'keeper liability' - they have never served NtK, as it happens I am not the keeper of this car... does the fact that I have appealed make any difference, can they still use PoFA to go after the keeper? - and no I've not identified the driver.



Because you appealed the NTD (Notice to Driver) they will (wrongly) believe you're the driver.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HolyNougat
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 08:00
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



So if I just write to them and say, Look, I was not the driver, nor am I the keeper, your window to go after the keeper is now closed - please get stuffed, that should be the end of it?! ;-)
I will try to dig out the original appeal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hellfire8
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 08:03
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,783
Joined: 2 Apr 2014
From: Essex
Member No.: 69,831



QUOTE (HolyNougat @ Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 09:00) *
So if I just write to them and say, Look, I was not the driver, nor am I the keeper, your window to go after the keeper is now closed - please get stuffed, that should be the end of it?! ;-)
I will try to dig out the original appeal.



I honestly don't see that working.

Best bet might be getting POPLA to re rule, but this depends on your Appeal contents.

LPS do, rarely go to court but they do go, and now you've lost a POPLA appeal you'll be marked as an easy target as loosing POPLA goes against you.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HolyNougat
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 08:09
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



Interesting.
I can actually prove that I was not the driver.... If it did go to court I don't really see how they could make it stick... under what authority could they pin the charge?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hellfire8
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 08:18
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,783
Joined: 2 Apr 2014
From: Essex
Member No.: 69,831



That changes things a little bit yes.

I still think your best course of action is getting POPLA to review their decision. if the Assessor has failed/missed a point (GPEOL) then they should rule in your favour.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HolyNougat
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 09:22
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



I can't seem to find my popla evidence...
I think I will just write to LPS saying I'm not the driver, I'm not the keeper, drop the case or I'll see you in court.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hoohoo
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 09:32
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,068
Joined: 18 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,768



Hahaha.

The parking company have fallen for the old switcheroo! They failed to check if you were appealing as driver or keeper; you were neither, and now the keeper liability window is shut.

Well done for accidentally pulling that off. They do it all the time (with the agent/principal thing) so it is amusing to see the biter bit for once.

I would go with your letter but just state you were not the driver.

Dear LPS,

I confirm that I was appealing on behalf of the driver, but was nt the driver. I can prove this as follows (your proof you mentioned here).
Any further contact with myself, other than to confirm you will not be pursuing me, will class as harassment. If you believe the charge is valid you must contact the driver directly from this point onwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hellfire8
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 10:38
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,783
Joined: 2 Apr 2014
From: Essex
Member No.: 69,831



I'd amend that a little bit



Dear LPS

I am writing to instruct you to cease contacting me with regards to the following PCN. As I was not the driver in question (Proof attached) and you have failed to comply with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act I am not liable for the charge.

Please direct all future correspondance to the driver, which I am not required to disclosed

Regards

XXXXXXX
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HolyNougat
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 12:15
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



OK - will be interesting to see what they come back with.
Something along the lines of 'oh - it must have been you' or something like that! ;-)
Is there always a requirement to issue a NtK? seems odd that they don't just do it automatically.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hoohoo
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 12:27
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,068
Joined: 18 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,768



QUOTE (HolyNougat @ Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 13:15) *
OK - will be interesting to see what they come back with.
Something along the lines of 'oh - it must have been you' or something like that! ;-)
Is there always a requirement to issue a NtK? seems odd that they don't just do it automatically.


There is no requirement to issue an NTK, but they have to if they want to pursue the keeper.

The clued up operators therefore issue one anyway. The knuckle-draggers don't.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Churchmouse
post Wed, 29 Jul 2015 - 18:49
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,356
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
From: Landan
Member No.: 20,731



POPLA seemed to think the Appellant was the driver: "The appellant parked without clearly displaying a valid pay & display ticket..." What proof do you have that you were not the driver? Would it outweigh the "proof" (assuming POPLA didn't just assume) that you were the driver?

--Churchmouse
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HolyNougat
post Thu, 30 Jul 2015 - 14:59
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Member No.: 72,214



Well, I was working at the time of the incident.
Additionally I have never admitted to driving the car.
The PP blog has an entry about pretty much exactly this situation where POPLA ruled again the parking company.
Basically it seems that they should always issue an NtK to be PoFA compliant, they can't assume they know who the driver is!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 14:37
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here