ANPR Ltd - Parking Charge notice **Appeal upheld at POPLA**

[ericsbrother]

They are in breach od the BPA code but there again they rely on smoke and mirrors to make any money so dont be surprised. The BPA wont admonish them otherwise they will cease to exist if all of their members are forced out because they dont play nicely.

[Billy's mate]

Post deleted as no longer relevant.

Edited December 16, 2013 by Billy's mate
No longer relevant

[schofield 16]

Hi Billy's mate

 

Thanks for your support... My appeal was all set to go until we found out they had generated my POPLA code over a month ago without telling me!!! I'm sending it anyway with a letter outlining ANPR's skullduggery They may listen they may not

 

We shall see

 

I have an orginal thread with more info Pics and scans

[ericsbrother]

By breaking the BPA code of practice they arent doing themselves any favours. If POPLA dont accept your late submission write to the BPA CEO and cmplain about the blatant misuse of the procedure by ANPR and ask them what they are going to do about it.

[schofield 16]

Appeal submiitted today with covering letter outlining the chain of events

 

I think i'll write to him (or her) anyway as ANPR are guilty of blatant ball tampering in this test match.. Maybe they were excpecting me to start swinging wildly at there fast fast blower .I wonder if N Martin has a large Moustache

 

I'll await The Bpa's intresting reply

[kirkbyinfurnesslad]

N Martin is not a real person

[schofield 16]

Then neither is his Moustache !! Maybe Mr A XXXXXhouse is the keeper of the Villian's Moustache...

[geoffh2]

Yes of course. The more the merrier

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Operator issued parking charge notice number xxxxxx arising out

of the presence at Lodge Drive, Warrington, on 31 August 2013, of a

vehicle with registration mark xxxxxxxx

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.

Edited January 24, 2014 by geoffh2

[geoffh2]

thanks to all you guys on here for the advice and the confidence to do it all, it was long and drawn out (5months) but worth it in the end

 

 

thanks ericsbrother, esmerobbo and bettyboo (who I hope isn't a guy) and anyone else who helped me

[geoffh2]

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

On 31 August 2013, a parking charge notice was applied to a vehicle with

registration mark xxxxxxx for leaving site without entering the premises.

The Operator’s case is that the terms and conditions for parking in the car

park are clearly displayed on signage throughout the site. The signage says:

“Free parking Whilst In Premises.” The Operator has produced photographic

evidence which show that the Appellant’s vehicle was left unattended at the

site and the driver was not in the premises. They have also supplied a copy of

the terms and conditions and photographs of signage location.

The Appellant has made a number of submissions, however, I will only

elaborate on the one submission that I am allowing this appeal on, namely

that the parking charge amount is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

The Operator rejected the Appellant’s representations, as set out in the

correspondence they sent because they state that a breach of the car park

conditions had occurred by leaving site without entering the premises. They

say that the parking charge is issued for damages incurred whilst the driver

trespassed on land under their control.

In this present case, the Operator has not sought to justify the amount of

parking charge representing the loss suffered by the landowner. I have

carefully considered the Operator’s submissions and considering everything

before me, I do not find that the parking charge represents a genuine

pre-estimate of loss suffered.

Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

Aurela Qerimi

Assessor

[schofield 16]

Well done

Still waithing on my appeal being heard (begining of Feb) I'll report back when i here

[geoffh2]

thanks scho good luck with your appeal mate

[BETTYBOO1954]

Definitely not a guy! Glad to hear of your success. Your letter from assessor much the same as mine. Doesn't it feel great!!. Loads of people park there now and know it's safe. This site's the best. Let's hope they all go out of business. Take care and happy parking. The precedent has now been set.

[ericsbrother]

I note that the assessor didnt want to go further than considering the loss of the operator. This gives them an easier decision as the other matter of leaving the site is one already made by a higher court and so the parking co claiming it is part of the parking conditions would only end up getting into an argument that could end up in the high court and spoiling the game for all the PPC's

[IPC1963]

Your response from POPLA was identical to mine for the same site. Mr Whitehouse has until monday to respond to my LBA and then I am persueing him for my costs. A lengthy detailed complaint has been sent to the BPA insisting on action if this is not done I will be informing DVLA of the BPAs lack of action. The landowner has shown no interest when various factions have tackled her. Lets see if its the same when she is tackled as principle when claims are made against ANPR Ltd.

[Billy's mate]

This is a brilliant thread !. Good luck to all those involved in disputes at the moment. Please keep us posted on here with your progress.

[filrobbo]

The DVLA have a lot to answer for, if they didn't give out details to these undesirable companies, we wouldn't have to fight them, we should all make a complaint to your local mp and relevant government body that covers DVLA to stop this action.