PCN due to change of location code Options

[Son of Captain A]

Hi all,

PCN received through the post.

The driver parks fairly often in a space by a gym they use. There are green visitors bays. The driver pays via the app - the payment didn't go through as the app kicked back an error regardless of which payment method the driver tried (bank card, Android pay).

It was chucking it down so the driver didn't go to check the sign for the number, just figured they'd chance it as it was always a parking warden there rather than ANPR and they've parked there a few times without getting a ticket.

Lo and behold the keeper got a ticket through the post.

The driver went back to check the signs at the weekend (all located min 30 metres from the parking bay and not lit as can be seen in the photos which their camera did brighten) and saw that they had actually changed the parking location code by putting stickers over the top of the number. The app autocompletes the location code and name.

We imagine there's nothing that they can do but thought it worth a shot so any help would be great and please just shout if they've missed any vital info.

Images below - hope they suffice.

Thanks in advance.

[Advertisement]

[Son of Captain A]

Hi gang,

So the keeper received the rejection of their first appeal.




The keeper has checked: sunset on the day in question was 9 minutes after the entry to the site so the claim that it was daylight is incorrect.

The keeper now has the POPLA code and would like some help with the next stage.

Many thanks and hope you are all having a nice run up to Xmas.

This post has been edited by Son of Captain A: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 - 12:02

[nosferatu1001]

The keeper knew this would be rejected so hopefully in the last week theyve found some example POPLA appeals, to get an idea of their content?

MSE FORUM -> NEWBIES THREAD -> POPLA section for another sset of examples.

[Son of Captain A]

Am working on it there - thanks.

Is there a MOD around who can allow me to edit the first post of this thread? It's timed out and I need to make some changes.

[nosferatu1001]

Mods don't come because you say in a thread

Hit report, it alerts them.

[Son of Captain A]

Thanks Nosferatu1001.

[Son of Captain A]

Hi all,

Hope you had great Christmasses etc!

The research has been done over at MSE:

Would it be correct to assume the response would cover (including the accurate references from the BPA Code of Practice):

1The PPC fails to include the specific wording required by the Protection of Freedoms Act to recover payment from the registered keeper
2 Contrast and Illumination: the signs are illegible in the dark and in breach of the British Parking Association Code of Practice
3 The assertion that a driver can contract to perform an action that is forbidden is nonsense
4 Even if such a contract were possible, they changed the location code for the car park but did not update the auto-locate for the payment system, preventing its acceptance
5 Even if the payment system did not use auto-locate, their failure to provide a transition and additional signs is in breach of the British Parking Association Code of Practice Para 18.10
6 No T&Cs displayed anywhere for entry into the contract
7. Evidence of landowner authority not present
8. Evidence that the cameras have been checked, adjusted, calibrated, synchronised with the timer which stamps the photos and generally maintained to ensure the accuracy of the dates and times of any ANPR images
9 Signage has reference to where visitors should park but no clarity on if charges apply to the visitor (only on external sign, not internal)
10 Operator hasn't allowed the recommended time allowance for the payment of the fees after the appeal has been rejected (recommended 35 days)
11 Entry sign is not compliant with British Parking Association Code of Practice in that it does not indicate that any terms & conditions apply
12. Entry sign is not compliant in that it does not carry any information from Group 1 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice
13. Entry sign is not compliant in that it uses Group 2 text much larger than Group 1 from the British Parking Association Code of Practice

Many thanks

An addition:

Schedule 4 of the protection of freedom act 2012, 9(2)(e):

(e)state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

From the parking ticket:

"As we do not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and having reasonable cause that a contravention occurred through a breach of the car park terms and licensing conditions, the vehicle details were passed to the driver and the Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) and your details were requested as the Registered Keeper on the date of the event. Or the Registered Keeper has named you as the driver on the date of the event"

Is it correct to assume: the difference here is that they are not inviting the keeper to pay NOR are they asking the keeper to send the name and address along?

Thanks, would like to get this wrapped up asap.

[Son of Captain A]

Anyone?

Cheers.

[nosferatu1001]

Just write the appeal already
You've seen a dozen or so by now
No ones got the time right now to cover so many points. Especially as you can copy and paste most.