NO. not that.

OK, looks like your wife nipped in for 13 minutes, then later, you were even quicker (seven minutes)?

I would use Redivi's suggestion, but add at the end, before yours faithfully'

Your client has already been informed that the first driver was my wife and the second driver (not knowing my wife had briefly gone there earlier) was me. Along with the information you have so far withheld, now I also require that you show me the evidence you hold and have inspected, that your clients think they are relying on to wrongly suggest that the same driver 'returned'.

Just use the template appeal from the MSE NEWBIES thread to show you are not ignoring the scam.

It WILL be rejected. The appeal is not designed to 'work' as such, just to send a message and to look reasonable, without shooting yourself in the foot with a bad appeal.

No trying IAS stage - see any other IPC firm threads on either here or MSE to learn why not. Basically, two words - kangaroo court.

Come back when they sue you - see any other Gladstones UKCPM thread, on either forum. Yes, they will, and yes you are likely to win. Looks like a residential block so read any other residential or permit defence thread as preparation. If that is your home car park, make plans to move asap (not joking) as you do not want to share your home car park with a UKCPM infestation of scammery.

No paying it! That would be shameful for any clued up forum poster, IMHO as it's funding and sponsoring the next PCNs against more victims who might not find a forum.

Agreed. But no appealing to the IAS, though, at all.

Because it was templatey and misconceived, and aimed primarily at forcing the case to a hearing - i.e. it had no chance.

Obviously you give your name and address, as keeper of the car.

Then above are not 'case law'. They are just County Court decisions that you can suggest are on all fours with your own case. No precedent, no 'case law'.

The defence looks good to me.

Later on at WS and evidence stage, you can use this BPA article as evidence that there is definitely a thign called an 'observation period' to decide if you will stay or go:

https://www.britishparking.co.uk/News/good-...s-grace-periods

See the article under his grinning mug. He has really helped load of people with that article over the years!



Just read that utter drivel from the above, he should be ashamed of this one. Five minutes indeed, despite the BPA CoP. Scammery extraordinaire

Appeal any BPA firm windscreen PCN ON DAY 26 (not sooner or later) online, using the template in the MSE NEWBIES thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showth...d.php?t=4816822

You then ignore any begging letter asking who was driving, and hope they forget to send you a Notice to Keeper (all explained in the Q&A in the link...). Then win at POPLA because you haven't blabbed about who was driving and hopefully your made them forget a NTK by appealing at the optimum time.

I am not sure anyone can add much to your sterling work, Derek. Loving the pressure exerted on the DVLA, ICO and using your MP to good effect.

I have a similar mindset in that I do not believe you are legally obliged to show your VRN when you drive in/out of any retail park - why should you show that data? If everyone covered their numberplates when driving in/out of the Supermarket car park where we all shop, what are they going to do, ban people? How and why?

Highview never sue anyone at the tie of writing this, so ignore them - but publicise it.



Sorry the appeal was lost/will be lost.

The registered keeper would have won first time (one appeal) had they appealed using the usual forum templates from here or MSE, without saying who was driving. No POPLA needed.

Any chance of closing this thread as the Radio show was used by a certain company for publicity.

Anyone seen their recent TrustPilot reviews and their 'replies'?

bargepole is not 'that person'.

Fast ReplyReply to this topicStart new topic
5 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
3 Members: SchoolRunMum, BikerPaul, Redivi

It makes a mockery of the intention of the POFA, yes.

But if you give a parking firm an inch they will take a mile, and so they thought up this jolly wheeze that they could issue ''non-POFA'' PCNs late (driver only ones) and the Trades Body and the DVLA said, ''oh, OK then, we'll allow a 2 tier system, carry on!''

Loads of PPCs ignore the POFA and chose not to 'use' it. Not what Parliament intended.

But victim drivers are stupid or naive enough to pay up anyway, as they are scared it's a real PCN.

Thus, it works for the scammers.

The consensus of opinion here is that neither of those help you to cancel the ticket/win appeal.

When you say you already tried complaining, did you escalate it and try the retail park owners et al, like I said (I didn't just mean one complaint). Can't stress this enough:



You cannot complain after trying POPLA, so think whether you have tried every avenue, every Manager. If you lose at POPLA you then have no avenues.

Use bargepole's concise defence instead, with ONE point added which talks about the facts of the car park and denies liability for whatever the Particulars of Claim say.

I agree with Umkomaas:

I suggest you remove the post about the sandwich, as PPCs read this forum. Remove it NOW.

You were not there so you don't know that the driver was not simply reading the sign or getting change to pay and display.

But this is the silver bullet anyway, that shows it's a non POFA PCN:



Submit that by email or on any online appeals page the PCN makes available, and not by post unless given no other option,

Well done on your win!

Have you also forwarded that text to the BPA to add to your complaint? You MUST give them the PCN ref or they can't look at it.

Are ZZPS regulated by the FCA? If so, also complain to them about this conduct.

I think if you want a re-trial then you will need to put in an appeal. See what others say.

Did you already blab about who was driving? If so, then 'not relevant land' won't be possible as an argument.

Did you leave well BEFORE the expiry of the P&D ticket? i.e. paid for the full parking time?

As long as you didn't say in your appeal that you are familiar with the car park and 'always pay', then go all out to prove to POPLA that the signs are not lit at night, if that arrival photo is at night/early hours, and as dark as it looks.

Get photos in the dark with no flash, lots of them.

If you've admitted to being familiar with the car park I am struggling to see a case, as you couldn't then say you were not given the opportunity to see the terms in the dark.

Those signage photos are brilliant evidence. POPLA would be mad to think they are capable of prominently communicating a contract to display a permit or pay £100.

If you are not sure what to expect, read some completed cases on here.

Or search MSE forum for the keywords another one bites the dust which I type under every court win, and will show you loads and loads of tips and outcomes and court reports.

And on here, MST just posted his experience and tips, as he just won.

Love that outcome!

See the MSE NEWBIES thread post #2 about LBC and court stage.

CEL normally muck it up.

Plenty of defences on here and on MSE, and many are about failure of a phone app and that the driver made 'reasonable endeavours' to pay.

Search both forums for Jolley v Carmel defence as your keywords and you will be able to read what happened in shedloads of similar cases, and how to write a defence.