Free Traffic Legal Advice

WOW! That's an insanely detailed reply. I feel ashamed for the slap-dash attempt made with ChatGPT.

Would it be possible to cut and paste your response for the POPLA appeal? I'll start with the beginning:

I, the registered keeper of this vehicle, received a letter dated XX acting as a notice to the registered keeper. My appeal to the operator – Britannia Parking – was submitted on XX and subsequently rejected by a letter dated Monday 13th May 2019. I contend that I, as the keeper, am not liable for the alleged parking charge and moreover, there is no legal obligation for the keeper to identify the driver and I decline to do so.

As such, as the keeper, I wish to appeal against it on the following grounds:

Thanks so much!!!

Thank you once again!! I am almost ready to send this.

Would the following images work for the inadequate signage bit? https://imgur.com/a/V9bTdGg

I'm on the popla site now, should the appeal be made under "Others" and "I was not the driver or the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the alleged improper parking"?

Hi, thanks everyone for the replies, especially DWMB2!

As expected, Brittania has responded to my POPLA appeal with a whopping 78 page long document, with "7 days to provide my comments on the operator evidence."

I doubt I'm going to win the POPLA stage!

Hi, yes most of it is boilerplate but I can't find where the landowner contract is!

I have uploaded the PDF here, with personal details censored.

Thanks a lot once again. I owe you a coffee AND ten pints whatever you drink!

Quote from: phlegmborough2 on July 19, 2024, 11:29:47 pm

Hi, yes most of it is boilerplate but I can't find where the landowner contract is!

I have uploaded the PDF here, with personal details censored.

Thanks a lot once again. I owe you a coffee AND ten pints whatever you drink!

Floating by - i don't know how you edited your file but for whatever reason the red blotches that you have put on take time to load in - I can see the date/registration number for a few seconds before your censoring kicks in.

also as an FYI:  on Pages 40 (left image) and pages  62, 63, 65 - there isn't an attempt at redacting your car plate at all.

Phew, thanks for this!!

The length of their response is not necessarily indicative of its quality. Much of it will be boilerplate, and some perhaps not even pertinent to the case in hand.

You should read through it carefully - look for any points within it that support your appeal. Check they have addressed all the points in your appeal - if they have not, draw attention to this failure. If any evidence is missing, point this out.

Take particular care to look at the land holder contract they have provided, is it valid? Check the dates, was it in force at the time of the parking incident?

I can't promise I'll be able to comb the whole document, but if you upload a version (with any of your personal details removed) to something like Dropbox or Google Drive, we can take a quick look for any obvious deficiencies.

If I don't respond to Britannia's comments, would that lower my odds of winning the appeal?

Hi everyone,

Unsurprisingly, my POPLA appeal has failed. This was their response:

"The appellant disputes that the notice to keeper complies with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. They explain that the operator has not shown who it is pursing is the driver of the vehicle. They advise that the images on the PCN do not comply with the British Parking Association code of practice. The appellant questions the adequacy of the signs on the site. The appellant believes that the notice to keeper is inadequate as the reason for issue is not accurate. The appellant has asked to see evidence that the operator holds a valid contract with the landowner. The appellant has provided two photos of the site, a copy of the PCN and details of their payment."

Assessor supporting rational for decision

When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the parking operator has issued the parking charge notice correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. The signs advises that the driver must pay for their stay or a parking charge of £100 will be issued. Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 sets out the requirements for a notice to keeper within Section 9 the required working is explained. The copy of the notice to keeper provided invites the keeper to pay the charge or name the driver and as such is fully complaint. As the notice to keeper is fully complaint the operator can hold the keeper of the vehicle liable and does not need to show that this was the driver. The operator has provided date and time stamped image taken from its ANPR system. These images are then included on the PCN. There is no requirement for the date and time stamps to be included on the PCN. The images have dated and time stamps which complies with Section 21.5a of the British Parking Association code of practice. A previous POPLA appeal cannot set a president for a subsequent appeal. There is nothing within the code of practice that says the images cant be cropped and Section 21.51 (f) advises that they can be enhanced the image of the VRM for clarity, cropping and zooming the images meets these requirements. I note that this can be seen on the example of the PCN provided by the appellant. The appellant has provided evidence of a payment which they made to park at the site. This evidence shows that the driver paid to park for three hours. The ANPR images show that the driver exceeded this period on the site. As the drivers payment did not cover their stay the drivers payment was not valid. As such the correct reason for issue has been used. The operator has handled this appeal an a professional and reasonable way at all points during the appeals process in full compliance with Section 2.6, and 9.1 of the British Parking Association code of practice. The appellant and the operator have provided photos of the signs. Section 19 of the British Parking Association code of practice sets the requirements for signs. Section 19.1 deals with entrance signs and Section 19.3 deals with general signage. Further to this the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 advises that the amount of the PCN must be clear. Both sets of evidence provided shows that there is a clear entrance sign. The operator’s images confirm that clear prominent signs have been placed throughout the site. These signs are dark blue so stand out. The signs have been placed in locations were they can easily be seen. I also note that the amount of the PCN is clearly visible and has been placed in a white box to make it stand out. This meets the requirements of both the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and the British Parking Association code of practice. Section 7 of the British Parking Association code of practice advises that the operator must have a valid contract for a site which it does not own. The operator has provided a redacted copy of this contract which is sufficient to show that it has the authority to issue PCN on this site. There is no requirement for the operator to provide an unredacted contract. After considering the evidence from both parties, the driver did not purchase enough parking and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. As such, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I must refuse the appeal."

Would appreciate any advice on how to handle this. There are only two options for me now - pay the 100 quid or head to the Citizen's Advice Bureau (not sure how the latter is going to work though!)

Thanks so much!