PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

PCN received from Premier Park, £100 charge for a period of 5 minutes
dingleberry
post Mon, 21 May 2018 - 20:22
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



Hi there,

My SO has just handed me a PCN he has received from Premier Park as he is the RK of the vehicle in question. This charge if for being in a private car park for 5 minutes. I wondering if you could tell me if this PCN meets the conditions on POFA? I have a niggling feeling that it does and we are quite distressed about this as we are on low income as I am chronically ill and can barely afford to pay for food so certainly cannot afford to pay this. I would like to appeal but am disheartened that we won't have a chance if they have adhered to POFA. I have included a scan of the PCN and have redacted my SO's details for our protection. We also went to visit the car park to look at the signs, I will include the images. As you can see, this car park includes two residents parking spaces, the PCN shows 4 photographs of the vehicle entering and exiting the car park with close ups to the reg, but provides no evidence that the vehicle was parked in a Vets4Pets parking bay. I intended on refusing to provide drivers details and challenging on the basis that they cannot provide evidence that the driver parked in the Vets4Pets bay instead of the residential bays. I can say unequivocally to you guys that the driver would have not parked there intentionally had they seen signage but on inspecting signage I expect that it would be considered clear enough and so I am very concerned about this. Thank you.

Here is a link to the gallery with all the files:
https://postimg.cc/gallery/36v06ci06/

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Mon, 21 May 2018 - 20:22
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 11:06
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Why on earth is it making you nervous?
From memory they have 28 days. Given you cannot do anything to speed them up, just ignore it for now
Rememebr you will need to comment on teir evidence, so check that an email from POPLA doesnt go to your junk file.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 11:17
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



QUOTE (Macapaca @ Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 12:05) *
It can take several weeks so no need to panic. PP put alot of effort into their POPLA appeals and so typically take a bit longer to compile.


Thanks. When you say a lot of effort what exactly do you mean? What sort of evidence would they collate?


QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 12:06) *
Why on earth is it making you nervous?
From memory they have 28 days. Given you cannot do anything to speed them up, just ignore it for now
Rememebr you will need to comment on teir evidence, so check that an email from POPLA doesnt go to your junk file.


All these comments about perjury, they just sound relentless.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 11:19
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



Perjury? PP are saying that?
Yawn. Its PP.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 11:26
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 12:19) *
Perjury? PP are saying that?
Yawn. Its PP.


No about "the witness statement on behalf of the landowner being signed by Premier's own accountant" and faked solicitors letters, just the lengths they will go to get £100, crazy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 11:51
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,868
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



I've just had a read of the British Parking Association response when Premier was reported for the fake statements

After investigation it was concluded that there wasn't a breach of the BPA Code of Practice but Premier was advised on presentation

The reasoning appears to be that **** is authorised to sign on behalf of the land-owner doesn't exclude Premier staff that have been authorised

The BPA did, however, concede that it was unable to identify the person named on the witness statements and, for a short time afterward, POPLA assessors were finding unusual reasons to accept Premier appeals when the integrity of the witness statements had been questioned


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 12:03
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



In my POPLA appeal PP's evidence pack was surprisingly long but mainly comprising attachments such as the landowner's contract and logs of the pay machine to try to prove that I hadn't paid which I had. The landowner's contract was interesting because it was out of validity and POPLA just ignored that!
After initial robo letters which clearly had taken no effort to write and ignoring all my requests for information they bombarded POPLA with everything they could dig up to try and win. Their tactic is clearly to try to win at POPLA and then apply pressure to pay up. After POPLA they resort to more bald robo letters until they eventually give up if they meet resistance.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 12:04
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



QUOTE (Redivi @ Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 12:51) *
I've just had a read of the British Parking Association response when Premier was reported for the fake statements

After investigation it was concluded that there wasn't a breach of the BPA Code of Practice but Premier was advised on presentation

The reasoning appears to be that **** is authorised to sign on behalf of the land-owner doesn't exclude Premier staff that have been authorised

The BPA did, however, concede that it was unable to identify the person named on the witness statements and, for a short time afterward, POPLA assessors were finding unusual reasons to accept Premier appeals when the integrity of the witness statements had been questioned


Shocking. So is there even any point at the end of this for me to complain to BPA about PP not adhering to their code of conduct?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 12:16
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



If there is something worthy of complaint then yes you should complain. However don't hold you breath for the answer you would like!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 15:21
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



Speak of the devil, PP have submitted their evidence packs, I kinda feel like they have shot themselves in the foot with this. They say that a 5 minute grace period should be enough because it is a small car park (not taking into account drivers mobility and reading comprehension) but surely a different grace period from the BPA COC would have to have been agreed upon with the BPA previously? They also say that all the parking spaces are for Vets4Pets customers when thats is untrue, two are residential and they have even themselves provided photographs of the residential parking spaces. I ask for a unredacted contract with landowner and they have given a redacted copy signed by managing agent. Nevertheless, I suppose this could still go either way. Here are redacted copies of the two PDFs which for some reason they have uploaded both 4 times, I have not spotted any difference between the uploads so why they have done that, god knows. Will have to upload PDFs separately.

Just trying to find a way to reduce the file size of the second PDF.

This post has been edited by dingleberry: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 15:28
Attached File(s)
Attached File  PP_Evidence_Pack_Redacted2.pdf ( 1.63MB ) Number of downloads: 18
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 15:58
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



Couldn't get the file size down small enough so here it is:
http://docdro.id/5w1DUS1
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 16:37
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,868
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



Can't work out why but something about that contract doesn't look right

There's a thread on MSE regarding Torquay Marina where Premier has presented a contract with M & M Properties Ltd instead of MDL Developments

The contract says that M&M is either the land-owner or authorised by the land-owner
The Land Registry can inform you who owns the property but that won't help if M&M is simply "authorised"

Could phone London Clancy and ask how to contact M&M

A point to make in rebuttal is that Premier says that it operates a 5 minutes grace period
As their own evidence states that you were there for 5 minutes, not 6, you didn't exceed the grace period and the PCN wasn't correctly issued
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 16:45
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,140
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



Original Contract for a year. Have they showed that it has been continued?

Have they shown that the managing agent has the right contract? Nothing to show that.

Signs are forbidding, both the original signs and the Premier Parking ones. No offer of parking to Non Clients therefore no contract = no breach and therefore there can be no charge for breach. Only claim can be for trespass by the landowner.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 16:49
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



QUOTE (ostell @ Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 17:45) *
Original Contract for a year. Have they showed that it has been continued?

Have they shown that the managing agent has the right contract? Nothing to show that.

Signs are forbidding, both the original signs and the Premier Parking ones. No offer of parking to Non Clients therefore no contract = no breach and therefore there can be no charge for breach. Only claim can be for trespass by the landowner.


It says there is a rolling Contract Extension option in place should both parties wish to continue, would they need to evidence this?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ostell
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 16:52
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,140
Joined: 8 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,457



You insist that they need to evidence that it has been rolled over.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Tue, 10 Jul 2018 - 17:04
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Looks like a typical PP evidence pack with lots of photos if signs. Actually the fact that there are so many means that 5 mins to read them all carefully and decide if the driver wishes to stay or not is not unreasonable. In any case you have not exceeded their 5 minute grace period!
The landowner contract is typical of PP and statements about rolling contracts. If it has been rolled over then they should have absolutely no difficulty in proving it! However, POPLA will probably gloss over that important point.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nosferatu1001
post Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 07:42
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,616
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Member No.: 15,642



So your rebuttal needs to be simple:

1) the operators evidence pack confirms that no breach of terms took place, as the alleged overstay was 5 minutes, and they claim to operate a 5 minute grace period. The PCN was not correctly issued and therefore the appeal must be upheld
2) If POPLA disagree then as a MINIMUM ten minutes grace period is required anyway, this breach of the BPA CoP means the PCN was not correctly issued and, again, the appela must be upheld
3) The supposed contract has expired and the operator has not provided strict proof that it was extended. This is a breach of the BPA CoP and the appeal must succeed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 21:48
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



QUOTE (nosferatu1001 @ Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 08:42) *
So your rebuttal needs to be simple:

1) the operators evidence pack confirms that no breach of terms took place, as the alleged overstay was 5 minutes, and they claim to operate a 5 minute grace period. The PCN was not correctly issued and therefore the appeal must be upheld
2) If POPLA disagree then as a MINIMUM ten minutes grace period is required anyway, this breach of the BPA CoP means the PCN was not correctly issued and, again, the appela must be upheld
3) The supposed contract has expired and the operator has not provided strict proof that it was extended. This is a breach of the BPA CoP and the appeal must succeed.


Thanks for the advice guys, I have submitted my comments. I'll let you know when I know. Fingers crossed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SchoolRunMum
post Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 21:50
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,682
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Member No.: 32,130



Makes no odds, you won't be paying. no need to cross your fingers, you might lose but so what? PP win quite a few POPLA appeals and people here just ignore them and sit tight.

Search this forum and MSE parking form, for:

POPLA lost Premier

if it happens. No coming back thinking you have to pay, if this is lost!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dingleberry
post Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 21:57
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 May 2018
Member No.: 98,051



QUOTE (SchoolRunMum @ Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 22:50) *
Makes no odds, you won't be paying. no need to cross your fingers, you might lose but so what? PP win quite a few POPLA appeals and people here just ignore them and sit tight.

Search this forum and MSE parking form, for:

POPLA lost Premier

if it happens. No coming back thinking you have to pay, if this is lost!


Thanks SchoolRunMum, I had a little look before but will have a proper look when I can. I'll take your word for it though as you know what you're talking about.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Macapaca
post Wed, 11 Jul 2018 - 23:14
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 309
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Member No.: 94,458



Absolutely right. You will not be paying anything irrespective of whether your POPLA appeal is upheld or not!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
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: Friday, 21st September 2018 - 01:09
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.