I am posting this on behalf of a friend in a different 'Shire' but I know this won't make any difference. Because I have had dealing with them before, she asked me opinion and I said categorically, do not pay it.

They parked in a retail park and visited several stores for D.I.Y products and other shopping. When they returned to their vehicle it had the usual garbage attached to the windscreen.

The car park apprently has signage stating that it is only free parking for 4 hours and as they had over stayed this they were bound by their T&C's , hence the penalty charge notice.

I drafted them the usual letter to invoke their appeals process, denying any liability on the basis of (1) charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, (2) their signage does not comply with BPA etc and (3) they do not have authority or permission to issue invoices at that location.

Well, Parking Lie's administration appear to have tangled themselves up and sent the two replies below. One has the POPLA Appeal form attached.

Would appreciate your thoughts please.

Thanks in advance.

Shelley

Appeal to POPLA and wait for their response....

Have you waited for the NTK too arrive ???

Do not respond to the NTD (windscreen ticket) . You will ID the driver.

EDIT : From what I can see you have appealed the NTD.

So you will have to do the POPLA appeal as above "BBs" post.

a simple argument would be that it was 4 separate visits on the same day and it is for them to prove otherwise by making available the evidence they use in their claim and if that is automated number plate recognition then you want to see all of the vehicle entries/exits for every user of the car park to determine continuity of the recording.

I hope you can show a number of purchases at different stores to show that it was not a single event. Bank statement showing card transactions will kill them (not necessarily at POPLA but I dont think they would want to spend a lot of money on losing this appeal when it is obvious that even if the car was there longer than they allow it was harming the business of the shops to be involved in the bad publicity that will come about afterwards..

It appears my friend did NOT get the windscreen garbage as originally thought - the first they knew about this parking charge was a letter with a picture of their car parked, apologies for the incorrect information but I was passing on what I was advised.

Anyway, reading the two letters they have received, they appear to be contradicting themselves are they not? The first one states "You have not formed a legally binding contract with Parking Eye, under which any right to

invoice for payment for goods or services may arise; therefore as stated your invalid invoice is rejected", yet the other letter is the POPLA appeal form.

I will check about the receipts etc

Would someone kindly read the letters in post 1 please because I think the first letter is admitting they have no right to invoice for payment in my opinion?

There is no need to respond IMO.

Appeal to POPLA using the code they supplied.

Ignore their childish missives, and stop believing the rubbish they write!

Would someone kindly read the letters in post 1 please because I think the first letter is admitting they have no right to invoice for payment in my opinion?

The first letter would appear to be rejecting an invoice that has been sent to ParkingLie. Did you or your friend send ParkingLie an invoice or threaten to invoice them for time spent dealing with it?

It's not a letter saying that they have no right to invoice your friend, more's the pity

Would someone kindly read the letters in post 1 please because I think the first letter is admitting they have no right to invoice for payment in my opinion?

As DragonFly has suggested, in your initial appeal to PE , you have seemed to have invoiced them... Did you copy and paste an appeal without reading it?

What is the name of the retail park please?

You have a POPLA code so the appeal will be demanding , through sight of contract, that PE have lawful authority to issue and pursue Parking Charge Notices at the site in question... Among other points of course as well.

As it is a retail park with numerous outlets, a managing agent no doubt, and a landowner, then I would wager that PE will not be able to show any contract that will enable them to win at POPLA.

As DragonFly has suggested, in your initial appeal to PE , you have seemed to have invoiced them... Did you copy and paste an appeal without reading it?

 

 

What is the name of the retail park please?

 

 

You have a POPLA code so the appeal will be demanding , through sight of contract, that PE have lawful authority to issue and pursue Parking Charge Notices at the site in question... Among other points of course as well.

 

 

As it is a retail park with numerous outlets, a managing agent no doubt, and a landowner, then I would wager that PE will not be able to show any contract that will enable them to win at POPLA.

I'm not hooked up to my scanner at present but will post up what was our initial resposne. I am at hospital all day tomorrow so it maybe Thursday before I can get back to you, but I will. Thank you Armadillo.

It doesn't really matter what your initial appeal was as they have rejected it and given a POPLA code.

This has a twenty eight day shelf life so bear that in mind...

If you can give the name of the retail park, then we can do some digging...

It doesn't really matter what your initial appeal was as they have rejected it and given a POPLA code.

 

 

This has a twenty eight day shelf life so bear that in mind...

 

 

If you can give the name of the retail park, then we can do some digging...

They've called it the Leamington Shopping Park.

Parking

There are 522 parking spaces at the Park with a further 529 spaces at Sainsbury’s. Parking is free for up to 4 hours.

http://www.leamingtonshoppingpark.co.uk/information/

Can you pay for more than 4 hours parking onsite?

POPLA appeal.

The RK needs to deny liability for the charge.

Demand, through sight of contract, that PE have lawful authority to issue Parking Charge Notices at the site in question.

Show that the charge is not punitive.

Show the breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss that the charge must represent.

Parking

 

There are 522 parking spaces at the Park with a further 529 spaces at Sainsbury’s. Parking is free for up to 4 hours.

 

 

http://www.leamingtonshoppingpark.co.uk/information/

 

The information contained in this link is wrong because I was there yesterday and the Sainsbury's side of the Car Park is only permitted to park for 3 hours - then the other side of the Car Park is 4 hours.

 

 

Can you pay for more than 4 hours parking onsite?

No

 

The signage is 7 feet high on a lamp post and the Ts & C's are too small to read - photo's taken.

How can Parking Lie advertise that they are members of the BPA when clearly they are NOT. They maybe members of other organisations but that isn't advertised..... How does that sit with the AOS in their ability to obtain DVLA information?

 

POPLA appeal.

The RK needs to deny liability for the charge.

 

 

Demand, through sight of contract, that PE have lawful authority to issue Parking Charge Notices at the site in question.

That is my first and main appeal point

 

 

Show that the charge is not punitive.

How do I word that?

 

 

Show the breakdown of the genuine pre estimate of loss that the charge must represent.

Am I asking POPLA to show the gpeol?

I understand that POPLA do not take 'personal circumstances' into consideration but for a disabled person to manage to get around this complex or other's similairly, if they have medical conditions which require regular toilet facilities maybe because of diurectics, but need to eat regularly because of diabetes and do their shopping, this 4 hour window rule is rediculous. Is it worth adding that point?

You can add what you want but it is really for PE to show that they are being fair and it is easy to argue that the contract is unfair if they dont take such things into consideration. Same goes if cinema or restaurants on complex, are you supposed to leave halfway through and move your car? You should ask for copy of their Equalities Statement, something they should have under the old DDA and the EA. They will have been asked for it before so cant deny you sight of it otherwise you can slap in a complaint and force them to make the provisions.

Yes, GPEOL is still a runner and they will get held up by their own stipidity in trying to dely many stayed cases until the Beavis appeal was out of the way. they thought they would win more afterwards (they may yet do so) but POPLA has stayed them until after the Supreme Court has heard the appeal and that will be a couple of years away so yes, GPEOL is still good for at least offsetting the day for ages yet..

I have done a very good response to this PCN on the POPLA website appeal facility - keeping a print out of the submission before sending it - together with a picture of their poor signage.

Thank you all for your wonderful continued support on here. Truly amazing CAG family.

Will keep you posted.