Show Posts - la_u

Thank you for that appeal wording, a slightly modified version of it was submitted on 01/04/2025.A day later I received this email back from POPLA -When I go onto UKPC's website and search the reference I now get this -Therefore the ticket has been cancelled.I just want to say a huge thank you to DWMB2 and especially b789 for convincing me to appeal and for giving me all the information to do so.

Hello, I waited and have still not had a postal NTK. How can I go about the POPLA appeal please?

Hello, this response was received electronically today. Any recommendation on next steps?

Thanks, this has been submitted.

Good morning, I believe day 27 is tomorrow so was just coming back to get some advice for the online appeal wording?

Quote from: b789 on 03 Feb, 2025 15:33UKPC rely on most of their victims being low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree who will pay up out of ignorance and fear.This is 100% true.You said to come back nearer to day 27 and then submit an appeal, I assume that's because the notice was attached to the car rather than sent to me in the post?

Quote from: DWMB2 on 03 Feb, 2025 15:01If you think it's fair, you can pay, it's your money not ours. If you think it isn't, then you can (with a bit of effort and our support) pay nothing. In my view, it's sharp practice on the part of UKPC - if the vehicle had been parked like that without the scaffolding there, I'd say it was a reasonably issued charge*, as the car would be blocking 2 bays. I think this is the crux of it really. I hoped that a conventional appeal would be accepted based on the fact that another vehicle couldn't have used the space that was being obstructed by the construction fencing.

Thanks for the reply.As said above the notice lists the condition of the car park's term and conditions that were breached. The vehicle was not parked correctly within the markings of a bay or space, so the ticket says the condition that has been breached is "parked correctly within the markings of a bay or space".I think with some parking notices issued on private land they can be unfair, but this one seems fairer than most. The vehicle wasn't parked within the bay or space which is one of the conditions of the car park. I just wanted to know if it was worth appealing based on the fact that the only reason the vehicle was parked this way is because the space that was being blocked by parking over the line wouldn't have been useable with the construction fencing there. Do you think an appeal saying that much is likely to be rejected on the basis that their rules are the rules and they have been breached?From a little bit of research done online it seems to suggest that issuing a postal NTK is not a requirement if one has been left on the vehicle which is how this notice was received.I am a bit dubious of waiting until day 27 as it will mean that the reduced fee is no longer payable. I have read through some of the other threads on here and it seems that the tactic is to basically keep refusing to identify the driver until it goes to court and then hope they will drop the case right before the court date? Is that the gist of it?

Their notice lists the term that was breached.

I am the registered keeper of a vehicle that received a parking charge at the car park listed in the title.When the driver of the vehicle entered the car park, they parked in a space that was next to some construction work that is ongoing. The space they parked in was adjacent to a space that had construction fencing partially within it. As a car would not have been able to park in the bay with construction fencing partially within it, the driver parked partially in that bay to increase the space between the vehicle and the vehicle in another adjacent space.Is this worth appealing?https://imgur.com/qOBRD1Rhttps://imgur.com/BQKQxWmhttps://imgur.com/gIB7okDhttps://imgur.com/q2lncDhhttps://imgur.com/H8TWI19