Disabled Bay not displaying valid disabled badge/permit - POPLA APPEAL ALLOWED!, Parking Control Management UK LTD, Meadowhall Shopping Centre Options

[trubster]

So here we go, I got a ticket for being in a Disabled bay, I have not had time to renew my sons blue badge but the car has a DISABLED VED, I left a note on the windscreen saying "Disabled, see tax disc" but still got a ticket.

For the alleged "Breach of the terms and conditions signposted on the site" they want compensation of £95.00 (Inc VAT) or £57.00 (Inc VAT) within 14 days

They also refer to the invoice being a "Charge" which I am sure is against some ruling somewhere (Might be wrong - A charge of £95.00 is now due)

It waffles on about BPA and POPLA so my question is... keep schtum or appeal? I know the blue badge scheme is not valid in PPCs which is why I wasn't too fussed and left a note as it falls under the DDA and not the BBS.

Any advice appreciated. Thanks

----------------
Edit 5/3/13

Popla's Decision

5 March 2013
Reference: ---------- always quote in any communication with POPLA
Trubster (Appellant) -v- Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd (Operator)
The Operator issued parking charge notice number PM------- arising out of the presence at Meadowhall Shopping Centre, Red Upper, on 9 December 2012, of a vehicle with registration mark ---- ---.
The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

---------- 2 5 March 2013
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
At 14.59 on 9 December 2012, the Operator issued a parking charge notice because the vehicle with registration mark ---- --- was parked in a disabled bay but the Operator’s employee could not see a valid disabled badge on display. The employee then took a number of photographs of the vehicle, one of which shows the parking charge notice on the windscreen.
It is noted that on the copy of parking charge produced, it states that the full amount of the parking charge is £95, but that the reduced amount of £57 will be accepted if paid within 14 days. However on the back of the notice it states that £75 will be accepted if paid within 7 days. This is confusing for motorists and means that they will know not know how much to pay at what stage.
The Operator’s case is that the terms and conditions for parking are clearly displayed throughout the disabled parking areas and state that motorists parking in disabled bays must clearly display a disabled badge. Copies of the conditions have been produced. They also state that a failure to comply with the restrictions mean that a parking charge notice will be issued. The Appellant does not dispute this.
The Appellant made representations, stating that he has a disabled tax disc and he was with his disabled son. In addition the Appellant states that the Operator has no legal right to enforce parking charge notices issued on this land, and that the charge bears no relation to genuine loss to the Operator.
The Operator rejected the representations, as set out in the copy of the notice of rejection they sent, because no valid disabled badge was displayed on the windscreen.
The Operator submits that their authority to issue parking charge notices is not in question. In Paragraph 46 of the decision in VCS v HMRC it states:
VCS is permitted under the contract [with the landowner] to collect and retain all fees and charges from parking enforcement action
Membership of the Approved Operator Scheme does require the Operator to have clear authorisation from the landowner (if the Operator is not the landowner), to manage and enforce parking. This is set out in the BPA Code of Practice. Therefore the Operator is likely to have authority to issue parking charge notices.

---------- 3 5 March 2013
However, as the point was raised by the Appellant, then the Operator should address it by producing such evidence as they believe shows that they do have authority. The Operator states that they are not obliged to provide a copy of any authority but that if I wish to see it they will discuss the matter. However I may only make a decision on the basis of the evidence submitted to me and I am not permitted to enter into discussions with the parties. A copy of the contract has not been produced.
Having carefully considered all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, the Operator has not shown that they have authority to issue parking charge notices. As the Appellant submits that the Operator does not have authority, the burden of proof shifted to the Operator to prove that they do. The Operator has not discharged the burden. Further to this, the Operator has not clearly stated how much the Appellant should pay and when, whether £75 within 7 days, £57 within 14 days or £95 within 28 days.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
Shona Watson
Assessor

This post has been edited by trubster: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 - 18:33

[Advertisement]

[Basfordlad]

Here we go, free for all to use

(That fit the circumstances in the page)

Even the supposed date is tomoz it will proberly over run by a few weeks

Are they really that busy or are they just really slow?

Its just an estimated date.....

[minotaur]

Of course, what you are really after is positive discrimination.

[ManxRed]

Two atoms in a pub. One says to the other "I think I've lost one of my electrons".

The second atom says "Are you sure?"

The first atom replies "Yes. I'm positive."

[minotaur]

Two atoms in a pub. One says to the other "I think I've lost one of my electrons".

The second atom says "Are you sure?"

The first atom replies "Yes. I'm positive."

also - SPILK

This post has been edited by minotaur: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 - 20:25

[trubster]

Well I have had no reply from PCM, British Land, Smith whatever they are called that manage meadowhall, the investment bank (50% landowner) and a really sorry excuse for a reply from meadowhall.

Also POPLA have not given me a decision either.

Its time to "Up the ante"

Can someone help me with a MCOL Claim?

Thanks

[Basfordlad]

You wont be able to do a mcol for tht number of defendents ( I think) will need to be paper based

Send a pm to schoolrunmum to assist as this is her field

[SchoolRunMum]

Got the pm, I can help with the detail of the breach of the Equality Act but have no expertise with filling in a County Court form. Wageslave or bargepole for that bit I think, and you'll need to get a paper form from your local County Court.

Another idea is to up the ante with a draft Court Claim - I think wageslave used one of those before (effectively a blank one filled out to show that you mean business). See what others add tomorrow.

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 - 23:14

[dawmdt]

Got the pm, I can help with the detail of the breach of the Equality Act but have no expertise with filling in a County Court form. Wageslave or bargepole for that bit I think, and you'll need to get a paper form from your local County Court.

Another idea is to up the ante with a draft Court Claim - I think wageslave used one of those before (effectively a blank one filled out to show that you mean business). See what others add tomorrow.

You can download the blank form from the internet:

http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/HMCT...rt_forms_id=338

[trubster]

Got the pm, I can help with the detail of the breach of the Equality Act but have no expertise with filling in a County Court form. Wageslave or bargepole for that bit I think, and you'll need to get a paper form from your local County Court.

Another idea is to up the ante with a draft Court Claim - I think wageslave used one of those before (effectively a blank one filled out to show that you mean business). See what others add tomorrow.

You can download the blank form from the internet:

http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/HMCT...rt_forms_id=338

Its quite difficult to get 5 defendants on that one

[trubster]

Well Thank you Shona, I was hoping you could rule on the Disabled Badge and Equality Act, but either way Thank you for allowing my appeal

5 March 2013
Reference: ---------- always quote in any communication with POPLA
Trubster (Appellant) -v- Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd (Operator)
The Operator issued parking charge notice number PM------- arising out of the presence at Meadowhall Shopping Centre, Red Upper, on 9 December 2012, of a vehicle with registration mark ---- ---.
The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

---------- 2 5 March 2013
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination
At 14.59 on 9 December 2012, the Operator issued a parking charge notice because the vehicle with registration mark ---- --- was parked in a disabled bay but the Operator’s employee could not see a valid disabled badge on display. The employee then took a number of photographs of the vehicle, one of which shows the parking charge notice on the windscreen.
It is noted that on the copy of parking charge produced, it states that the full amount of the parking charge is £95, but that the reduced amount of £57 will be accepted if paid within 14 days. However on the back of the notice it states that £75 will be accepted if paid within 7 days. This is confusing for motorists and means that they will know not know how much to pay at what stage.
The Operator’s case is that the terms and conditions for parking are clearly displayed throughout the disabled parking areas and state that motorists parking in disabled bays must clearly display a disabled badge. Copies of the conditions have been produced. They also state that a failure to comply with the restrictions mean that a parking charge notice will be issued. The Appellant does not dispute this.
The Appellant made representations, stating that he has a disabled tax disc and he was with his disabled son. In addition the Appellant states that the Operator has no legal right to enforce parking charge notices issued on this land, and that the charge bears no relation to genuine loss to the Operator.
The Operator rejected the representations, as set out in the copy of the notice of rejection they sent, because no valid disabled badge was displayed on the windscreen.
The Operator submits that their authority to issue parking charge notices is not in question. In Paragraph 46 of the decision in VCS v HMRC it states:
VCS is permitted under the contract [with the landowner] to collect and retain all fees and charges from parking enforcement action
Membership of the Approved Operator Scheme does require the Operator to have clear authorisation from the landowner (if the Operator is not the landowner), to manage and enforce parking. This is set out in the BPA Code of Practice. Therefore the Operator is likely to have authority to issue parking charge notices.

---------- 3 5 March 2013
However, as the point was raised by the Appellant, then the Operator should address it by producing such evidence as they believe shows that they do have authority. The Operator states that they are not obliged to provide a copy of any authority but that if I wish to see it they will discuss the matter. However I may only make a decision on the basis of the evidence submitted to me and I am not permitted to enter into discussions with the parties. A copy of the contract has not been produced.
Having carefully considered all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, the Operator has not shown that they have authority to issue parking charge notices. As the Appellant submits that the Operator does not have authority, the burden of proof shifted to the Operator to prove that they do. The Operator has not discharged the burden. Further to this, the Operator has not clearly stated how much the Appellant should pay and when, whether £75 within 7 days, £57 within 14 days or £95 within 28 days.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
Shona Watson
Assessor

So lets see what PCM / Meadowhall have to say about this now as they have well and truly ignored my LBA

[SchoolRunMum]

Well done! Yes, very interested to see what Meadowhall have to say about his now if you just send them a copy of the decision and say summat like:

'POPLA have, as expected, upheld my appeal even though your agent PCM would not desist. PCM now have to drop this unlawful charge because their fake tickets are unclear and they failed to show a copy of the contract with yourselves. POPLA did not even need to consider the disability issues in my case since ALL PCMs tickets are non-compliant, a matter I am sure you will want PCM to rectify before they can pretend to 'fine' anyone else on your land.

But that is most certainly not the end of the matter as far as I am concerned; I cannot overlook the fact that the Equality Act 2010 was breached and I was unlawfully harassed, intimidated and severely inconvenienced by PCM's threats - and they are your agent, so you are liable for their actions regarding any disability discrimination. I remind you that I had a legal right to park in that disabled bay unharassed, under the Equality Act, and an agent's signs cannot circumvent the law by misleading visitors into believing that the (Council only, on-street only) irrelevant Blue Badge scheme is the only indicator of disability need allowed.

Now are you going to apologise and settle the matter out of Court for the sum requested for harassment damages in my Letter Before Action - or am I going to have to just go ahead and file the attached Small Claim form naming you as one of several parties liable for your agent's actions? Take formal notice that I will now pursue the latter course of action unless this is now settled to my satisfaction within seven days of the date of this letter, and you undertake to prevent your parking agent from breaking the Equality Act and the BPA Code of Practice in future. I expect an undertaking in writing not to put fake PCNs on any car in future which has a disabled tax disc or any other clear indicator of such need.' Enclose a copy of a form, filled out (get it from your local County Court).

This post has been edited by SchoolRunMum: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 - 19:10

[trubster]

Well done! Yes, very interested to see what Meadowhall have to say about his now if you just send them a copy of the decision and say summat like:

'POPLA have, as expected, upheld my appeal even though your agent PCM would not desist. PCM now have to drop this unlawful charge but that is most certainly not the ends of the matter as far as I am concerned. I have been harassed, intimidated and severely inconvenienced by PCM's unlawful threats - and they are your agent, so you are liable for their actions regarding any disability discrimination. I remind you that I had a legal right to park in that disabled bay unharassed, under the Equality Act 2010.

Now are you going to apologise and settle the matter out of Court for the sum requested for harassment damages in my Letter Before Action - or am I going to have to just go ahead and file the attached Small Claim form naming you as one of several parties liable for your agent's actions? Take formal notice that I will now pursue the latter course of action unless this is now settled to my satisfaction within seven days of the date of this letter, and you undertake to prevent your parking agent from breaking the Equality Act and the BPA Code of Practice in future. I expect an undertaking in writing not to put fake PCNs on any car in future which has a disabled tax disc or any other clear indicator of such need.' Enclose a copy of a form, filled out (get it from your local County Court).

Thanks SRM, I will hand deliver one to the chap who wrote me that lovely letter and based on his response there and then, I will forward copies of the same letter to PCM and all other parties involved

[SchoolRunMum]

Have added in a bit more in an edit (as you do!)

[Lynnzer]

Just making a remark. Shona seems to have been well trained by us at throwing out a claim when the question of landowner rights are questioned.
I would think this point would win perhaps 95% of all appeals.

[Jlc]

Brilliant!!! Good news. I'm getting to like Shona. But do they only have one adjudicator???

[bama]

Well done! Yes, very interested to see what Meadowhall have to say about his now if you just send them a copy of the decision and say summat like:

'POPLA have, as expected, upheld my appeal even though your agent PCM would not desist. PCM now have to drop this unlawful charge because their fake tickets are unclear and they failed to show a copy of the contract with yourselves. POPLA did not even need to consider the disability issues in my case since ALL PCMs tickets are non-compliant, a matter I am sure you will want PCM to rectify before they can pretend to 'fine' anyone else on your land.

But that is most certainly not the end of the matter as far as I am concerned; I cannot overlook the fact that the Equality Act 2010 was breached and I was unlawfully harassed, intimidated and severely inconvenienced by PCM's threats - and they are your agent, so you are liable for their actions regarding any disability discrimination. I remind you that I had a legal right to park in that disabled bay unharassed, under the Equality Act, and an agent's signs cannot circumvent the law by misleading visitors into believing that the (Council only, on-street only) irrelevant Blue Badge scheme is the only indicator of disability need allowed.

Now are you going to apologise and settle the matter out of Court for the sum requested for harassment damages in my Letter Before Action - or am I going to have to just go ahead and file the attached Small Claim form naming you as one of several parties liable for your agent's actions? Take formal notice that I will now pursue the latter course of action unless this is now settled to my satisfaction within seven days of the date of this letter, and you undertake to prevent your parking agent from breaking the Equality Act and the BPA Code of Practice in future. I expect an undertaking in writing not to put fake PCNs on any car in future which has a disabled tax disc or any other clear indicator of such need.' Enclose a copy of a form, filled out (get it from your local County Court).

SRM, I love you.

[SchoolRunMum]

Well done! Yes, very interested to see what Meadowhall have to say about his now if you just send them a copy of the decision and say summat like:

'POPLA have, as expected, upheld my appeal even though your agent PCM would not desist. PCM now have to drop this unlawful charge because their fake tickets are unclear and they failed to show a copy of the contract with yourselves. POPLA did not even need to consider the disability issues in my case since ALL PCMs tickets are non-compliant, a matter I am sure you will want PCM to rectify before they can pretend to 'fine' anyone else on your land.

But that is most certainly not the end of the matter as far as I am concerned; I cannot overlook the fact that the Equality Act 2010 was breached and I was unlawfully harassed, intimidated and severely inconvenienced by PCM's threats - and they are your agent, so you are liable for their actions regarding any disability discrimination. I remind you that I had a legal right to park in that disabled bay unharassed, under the Equality Act, and an agent's signs cannot circumvent the law by misleading visitors into believing that the (Council only, on-street only) irrelevant Blue Badge scheme is the only indicator of disability need allowed.

Now are you going to apologise and settle the matter out of Court for the sum requested for harassment damages in my Letter Before Action - or am I going to have to just go ahead and file the attached Small Claim form naming you as one of several parties liable for your agent's actions? Take formal notice that I will now pursue the latter course of action unless this is now settled to my satisfaction within seven days of the date of this letter, and you undertake to prevent your parking agent from breaking the Equality Act and the BPA Code of Practice in future. I expect an undertaking in writing not to put fake PCNs on any car in future which has a disabled tax disc or any other clear indicator of such need.' Enclose a copy of a form, filled out (get it from your local County Court).

SRM, I love you.

Awww...shucks!!!!!!!

[ItchyCrakus]

Get a room or use a dating site you two.

Go get 'em Trubby

This post has been edited by ItchyCrakus: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 - 10:13

[zamzara]

You may have won the appeal, but I think POPLA won themselves a case of fudge!

[instrumentsofjoy]

Am I right in thinking that this means all appeals to POPLA which ask for a copy of the contract between landowner and PPC will succeed?