Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: UKPC - Left Site Solatron Farnborough
FightBack Forums > Queries > Private Parking Tickets & Clamping
solle
Good morning, your assistance would be greatly appreciated.

I'll keep it short and sweet; Parked up, entered one of the shops on site, they didn't have what I was after so proceeded to go to B&Q (off-site, across the road)

22-06-13 Notice to Driver on windscreen
23-07-13 Notice to Keeper
07-08-13 Final Reminder

I would like to appeal thru POPLA, is the next stage to send an appeal to UKPC, what should I write?

You assistance would be much appreciated.

thanks



Umkomaas
Try something like this:

QUOTE
I am writing to you regarding parking charge xxxxxxxxxx issued to vehicle xxxx xxx on xxxxx at xxxxx.

The Registered Keeper of the above vehicle denies any liability for the unenforceable charge detailed in the above Parking Charge Notice.

The charge does not represent any form of genuine loss to yourselves or the landowner and it is therefore punitive and a PENALTY. A penalty cannot be levied by any private organisation.

If you contend the charge to be a genuine pre-estimate of losses suffered by you and/or the landowner, please provide a breakdown detailing any such losses.

** Add other points relevant to your case **

I require you to now confirm acceptance of this challenge and cancel the charge, or provide a POPLA verification code where a vigorous and robust challenge will be mounted.

No further correspondence will be entered into with you on this matter. If nothing further from you is received within 35 days of the date of this letter it will be assumed the challenge is accepted and the charge cancelled.

Failure to send a POPLA code would be a breach of the BPA Code of Practice. Be advised that failure to comply with a code of conduct to which you have committed is a prohibited practice under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, and I would not hesitate to report such a breach to the BPA, DVLA and Trading Standards.


I would give it 24 hours to see if anyone else might wish to contribute/suggest additions, amendments etc.

HTH
emanresu
So they saw you - or the ANPR camera saw you - and they did nothing to mitigate their "loss"? Ask what steps were taken by the person that saw you to do this.
parking-guide
This lists some basic arguments you can use, but sounds like you are already some way down the line.
Umkomaas
Also have a good read of this. Very similar case to yours.

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php...3.0;attach=2873
solle
Thank you for your help and some intersting reading. I will send a letter based on the template above and see what happens

cheers
matt285
QUOTE (solle @ Sun, 11 Aug 2013 - 08:20) *
22-06-13 Notice to Driver on windscreen
23-07-13 Notice to Keeper
07-08-13 Final Reminder


Quite funny - they give you 28 days from the receipt of the NtK to appeal, and then after 14 days they already send you a Final Reminder... bunch of morons.

Well at least this means you are still able to appeal, you need to get this first stage appeal in asap.

Then they refuse this and send you a POPLA code and you can crush them there. So far I think UKPC doesn't even bother to reply to a POPLA appeal, looks like they're happy to lose there instead of investing lots of time and money trying to make their (impossible) case.

Good luck!
solle
Hi.. quick update

Sent my soft appeal on the 12/08/13 and received a response yesterday but with no popla code!

They also mention that there was no record of me using the facilities which is incorrect as I entered Carpetright (on site) immediately after parking! The parking attendant would have tracked me from the moment I left the car then watched me go in and out of carpetright and then leaving site.

They are asking for either receipts (which I don't have as I didn't buy anything from Carpetright) or evidence that I was on site at the time of breach...

Any advice on how to proceed would be appreciated

thanks





The Slithy Tove
QUOTE (solle @ Sat, 31 Aug 2013 - 09:09) *
Sent my soft appeal on the 12/08/13 and received a response yesterday but with no popla code!

Oh dear, multiple failures to abide by the BPA Ltd AOS CoP.

I was going to say their letter is nothing more than acknowledgement of your appeal, as they haven't formally turned it down with a POPLA code. But they must acknowledge your appeal within 14 days (unless they make a final decision in that time). So even this is out of time.

Give them to the 35 day limit to give you a POPLA code, else tell them to stuff it. It's no use them asking for more info (which the BPA Ltd in their infinite lack of wisdom will say are "exceptional circumstances"*), as you have already told them they won't get any.

* Even if this were an attempt to extend the 35 day deadline, the CoP says they must provide you with a new date for resolution, which they have not done, so the "exceptional cisrcumstances" gambit also fails.


Make sure a complaint makes its way to BPA Ltd at some point.
nigelbb
Please can you upload a photo of the signs? Any evidence that you left the site is dodgy anyway but sloppy wording on the signs may have shot themselves in the foot. Do check up on the planning permission too as it's quite likely that to minimise road traffic that parking in one retail outlet & going to another on foot without moving the car is what the planners had in mind when allowing the development. Adjacent car parks should have give & take as it's just as likely for someone to park at B&Q then walk across the road to Carpetright as the other way round.
Gan
In a retail park where use of the car park is free to customers, the driver’s consideration is their promise to ‘be a customer’ and that they will do this by entering retail premises of one of the park’s retailers in exchange for being allowed to park.

BPA Legislation Guide 2.1.5

Nothing about making a purchase
Jlc
They'll only show their breakdown to the court. Cool, when they issue a POPLA code (blood + stone...) then you'll win as you'll be requesting proof... wink.gif
bama
yet again a PPC is err 'wrong' about Mayhook and Somerfield
Jlc
Strange they don't list Ibbotson vs VCS where 'leaving the site' is covered......... Could be because it undermines them. Nah.
matt285
QUOTE (solle @ Sat, 31 Aug 2013 - 09:09) *
Hi.. quick update

Sent my soft appeal on the 12/08/13 and received a response yesterday but with no popla code!


Keep it short and simple, by replying with the following:

"Dear Sir or Madam,

thank you very much for your letter of X which I received on Y.

I have nothing further to add to the representations you made and would thus like you to determine my appeal.

Please provide me with the means to refer this to the independent arbitrator should you not decide to cancel this charge.

Yours faithfully,

Z"

Note "independent" - POPLA isn't independent of course, but who give's a toss, you will still win there because UKPC never bothers to reply to any POPLA appeals (at least as far as I'm aware.)
solle
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Sat, 31 Aug 2013 - 09:30) *
Please can you upload a photo of the signs? Any evidence that you left the site is dodgy anyway but sloppy wording on the signs may have shot themselves in the foot. Do check up on the planning permission too as it's quite likely that to minimise road traffic that parking in one retail outlet & going to another on foot without moving the car is what the planners had in mind when allowing the development. Adjacent car parks should have give & take as it's just as likely for someone to park at B&Q then walk across the road to Carpetright as the other way round.




Thanks for all the replies, I think I'll send them a prompt as recommend by matt and see what happens!

nigelbb
That sign looks like it is actually in the car park. The important sign is the one at the entrance as this is the one that must contain the T&Cs you are agreeing to when forming the alleged contract for parking. There is clear case law that other T&Cs cannot be added after a contract is agreed. If the entrance sign just says 'Free Parking' that would be ideal:-)
andy_foster
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 06:21) *
That sign looks like it is actually in the car park. The important sign is the one at the entrance as this is the one that must contain the T&Cs you are agreeing to when forming the alleged contract for parking. There is clear case law that other T&Cs cannot be added after a contract is agreed. If the entrance sign just says 'Free Parking' that would be ideal:-)


Such a sign would have to communicate an offer capable of forming a contract if accepted. "Free Parking" would seem to lack any consideration flowing from the driver, and also arguably lack certainty. A contract must be formed at an instant, but that does not necessarily have to be the instant that you enter the car park. Where there is a 'point of no return' with barriers on entry and exit, any contract must be formed at that point if it has not already been formed, but entering a unobstructed car park does not necessarily constitute acceptance.
nigelbb
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 10:52) *
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 06:21) *
That sign looks like it is actually in the car park. The important sign is the one at the entrance as this is the one that must contain the T&Cs you are agreeing to when forming the alleged contract for parking. There is clear case law that other T&Cs cannot be added after a contract is agreed. If the entrance sign just says 'Free Parking' that would be ideal:-)


Such a sign would have to communicate an offer capable of forming a contract if accepted. "Free Parking" would seem to lack any consideration flowing from the driver, and also arguably lack certainty. A contract must be formed at an instant, but that does not necessarily have to be the instant that you enter the car park. Where there is a 'point of no return' with barriers on entry and exit, any contract must be formed at that point if it has not already been formed, but entering a unobstructed car park does not necessarily constitute acceptance.

The consideration in these cases is said to be the motorist entering the retail premises & shopping (not necessarily buying). I have a Tesco store near me where there is a large entrance sign that just says 'Parking' which is in front of an large inviting car park in front of a large inviting Tesco supermarket. There are small yellow signs high up on lamp posts dotted around the car park that have threats of £70 charges for contravening a variety of rules but in my view they have no force after the motorist has accepted the offer of parking.
andy_foster
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 13:24) *
The consideration in these cases is said to be the motorist entering the retail premises & shopping (not necessarily buying).


Presumably the BPA have decided that that constitutes consideration, not because any sane and rational person could ever think it does, but because they need to find something to call consideration in order to pretend to have a legitimate model.

nigelbb
QUOTE (andy_foster @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 13:36) *
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 13:24) *
The consideration in these cases is said to be the motorist entering the retail premises & shopping (not necessarily buying).


Presumably the BPA have decided that that constitutes consideration, not because any sane and rational person could ever think it does, but because they need to find something to call consideration in order to pretend to have a legitimate model.

Exactly!

Here is what they say in the AOS Legislation Guide http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Docu...0Nov%202011.pdf

QUOTE
2.1.5 What is the consideration in a parking services
contract?
The offer to provide a parking space is the key
consideration passing from the offeror, that is to say, from
the parking services operator.
However, both parties must provide consideration in
a contract, not just the offeror. Usually the offeree’s
agreement to pay for parking service will be the other
half of the bargain.
When no payment is required from the driver, there
will be another obligation on the driver that provides
the necessary consideration. This consideration does
not have to be monetary, and could be quite a minor
duty on the driver. It is arguable, for example that the
obligation to stick a timed ticket inside their windscreen
could be interpreted as the driver’s consideration, even
without them having had to pay for the ticket. In a retail
park where use of the car park is free to customers, the
driver’s consideration is their promise to ‘be a customer’
and that they will do this by entering retail premises of
one of the park’s retailers in exchange for being allowed
to park.
It can also be argued that in a retail park or supermarket
where there is a maximum stay time, the consideration
could be the amount that the driver agrees to pay if they
stay for longer than the maximum period.
The Slithy Tove
Just to show how ridiculous that is, the final part says,
QUOTE
It can also be argued that in a retail park or supermarket where there is a maximum stay time, the consideration could be the amount that the driver agrees to pay if they stay for longer than the maximum period.

which is wholly meaningless, as it is not any kind of positive action on the part of the motorist at the time of parking. The whole point of there being an "agreement to pay" is that some kind of event occurs to cement that agreement. This is purely circular and self-referential logic.
nigelbb
QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 16:04) *
Just to show how ridiculous that is, the final part says,
QUOTE
It can also be argued that in a retail park or supermarket where there is a maximum stay time, the consideration could be the amount that the driver agrees to pay if they stay for longer than the maximum period.

which is wholly meaningless, as it is not any kind of positive action on the part of the motorist at the time of parking. The whole point of there being an "agreement to pay" is that some kind of event occurs to cement that agreement. This is purely circular and self-referential logic.

I agree it's utter tosh. The consideration must be given to seal the contract. It cannot be given at some later time.

Personally I think the idea that the motorist enters into a contract for free parking is tosh too. Retail stores offer the facility of free parking to entice customers into their store in preference to going to a rival. Just as they offer toilets as a facility for their customers. I don't enter into a contract to pee when I use the loo in a store.
andy_foster
QUOTE (nigelbb @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 18:21) *
QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Mon, 2 Sep 2013 - 16:04) *
Just to show how ridiculous that is, the final part says,
QUOTE
It can also be argued that in a retail park or supermarket where there is a maximum stay time, the consideration could be the amount that the driver agrees to pay if they stay for longer than the maximum period.

which is wholly meaningless, as it is not any kind of positive action on the part of the motorist at the time of parking. The whole point of there being an "agreement to pay" is that some kind of event occurs to cement that agreement. This is purely circular and self-referential logic.

I agree it's utter tosh. The consideration must be given to seal the contract. It cannot be given at some later time.

Personally I think the idea that the motorist enters into a contract for free parking is tosh too. Retail stores offer the facility of free parking to entice customers into their store in preference to going to a rival. Just as they offer toilets as a facility for their customers. I don't enter into a contract to pee when I use the loo in a store.


If there was a genuine and reasonable offer of paid for parking after a period of free parking, there is no reason why this couldn't form a valid and lawful contract, subject to the usual requirements.

However, when the warning sign makes it clear that parking is not permitted after the expiration of the free period, any "you agree to pay £XXX if you overstay" clause cannot be a genuine contractual offer and could at best be liquidated damages if it were not a penalty and if there was a valid contract for the liquidated damages to apply to a breach of.
bama
nutshell
Gan
However, when the warning sign makes it clear that parking is not permitted after the expiration of the free period, any "you agree to pay £XXX if you overstay" clause cannot be a genuine contractual offer and could at best be liquidated damages if it were not a penalty and if there was a valid contract for the liquidated damages to apply to a breach of.

Are we making defences too difficult by giving the PPCs the opening to argue about the level of their charges and refer to often irrelevant cases ?

What if we took the proverbial "man on the Clapham bus" approach ?

If the terms and conditions plus the penalties are nearly identical to the council car park around the corner, is he going to interpret the sign as an offer or a warning.

If it's the latter, there was never a "meeting of the minds" to give rise to a contract

Isn't there some case law that phrases like "by parking here you are agreeing.." don't change the situation ?
nigelbb
Maybe it's just because I live in sleepy rural Norfolk but there are many supermarkets round here that have a car park for customer use & no rules or parking management at all. My local Waitrose doesn't have any signs up limiting the time I may park but then just like most other supermarkets why would they? I am unlikely to want to park my car there other than when I am shopping. They offer free parking as a facility to their customers and as an incentive to shop with them just like they offer toilets, chairs by the checkouts or free coffee to loyalty card holders.
solle
Update:

Jackpot - thanks for all the advice and support.






SchoolRunMum
Well done! Did you actually complain to the retail park management or Carpetright - or was that cancellation purely as a result of your appeal?
solle
Hi, it was cancelled based on my appeal. I made no other complaints.
Jlc
QUOTE (solle @ Thu, 26 Sep 2013 - 07:15) *
Hi, it was cancelled based on my appeal. I made no other complaints.

Remember they monitor this forum too...................... wink.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.