MET PCn - occupants left Southgate premises - Appealed - Southgate Park Stansted

[achrixy]

Hello, I had exactly the same problem.

Parked at Southgate Park Stansted, went to McDonalds then got a parking charge letter.

I stupidly appealed it and therefore revealed myself as the driver, and the appeal was of course rejected.

However the PCN letter came well after 2 weeks from when I parked there.

Is this good grounds to appeal to POPLA?

 

Hello,

I've been issued with a parking charge notice by MET for parking at Southgate Park Stansted.

The parking bays looked like they were there for the adjacent restaurants (McDonalds and Starbucks)

I went to McDonalds, left after 12 minutes,

26 days later got a parking charge letter.

Apparently I was not allowed to leave the car park on foot while I was parking there, and because I strayed more than 50 feet from the car I must now pay the charge. No obvious signs stating this, not something I would ever expect.

I stupidly appealed it and therefore revealed myself as the driver, and the appeal was of course rejected.

However the PCN letter came well after 2 weeks from when I parked there. Is this good grounds to appeal to POPLA.

[honeybee13]

Could you copy and paste the forum stikky questions and your answers onto the thread please?

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?462118-Have-you-received-a-Parking-Ticket

 

HB

[achrixy]

1 Date of the infringement 17th February 2018

 

2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 15th March 2018

 

3 Date received 18th March

 

4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [y/n?] No

 

5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes

 

6 Have you appealed? {y/n?] post up your appeal] Yes, can't access it now

 

Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up Yes

 

7 Who is the parking company? MET

 

8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] (346) Southgate Park, Stansted

 

 

For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. - Not sure

 

 

[dx100uk]

If this was anpr then they were out of time...ignore now

Until or unless you get a letter of/before claim

[achrixy]

The reply to my appeal (in which I stupidly said I went to McDonalds....)

 

Dear xxxxxx

Re: Parking Charge Notice Number xxxx (Vehicle: xxxxx)

Site: (346) Southgate Park

Issue date: 15/03/2018

POPLA Verification Code xxxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your correspondence received in regards to Parking Charge Notice . After careful

consideration we have decided to reject your appeal for the following reasons:

 

The terms and conditions of use of the car park are clearly stated on signs prominently displayed in this area. These

include that the car park is for the use of Southgate Park customers while they are on the premises only, that

McDonald's is NOT on Southgate Park and that there is no free parking for McDonald's.

 

Our records show that

your vehicle was left in this car park while you left Southgate Park walking in the direction of McDonald's therefore we

believe the charge notice was issued correctly and we are upholding it.

 

If you had wanted to park in this car park and go to McDonald’s you could have done so by paying the appropriate

parking tariff.

 

This decision, which has been based on the facts of the case and takes into account our consideration of any mitigating

circumstances, is our final decision.

 

You have now reached the end of our internal appeals procedure and you now have a number of options:

 

1. Pay or, if you were not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the incident, request the driver to pay the Parking

Charge Notice at the prevailing price of £60 within 14 days of today’s date. Please note that after this time the

Parking Charge Notice will revert to £100.

 

2. Make an appeal to POPLA, the Independent Appeals Service, within 28 days of the date of this letter by going to the

online appeals system at ...... using verification code: xxxxxxxx Please note that POPLA will consider

the evidence of both parties and make their decision based upon the facts and application of the relevant law.

 

Please note that if you opt to appeal to POPLA, and should POPLA’s decision NOT go in your favour, you will

be required to pay the full amount of £100. By law we are also required to inform you that Ombudsman Services

provides an alternative dispute resolution service that would be competent to

deal with your appeal. However, we have not chosen to participate in their alternative dispute resolution

service. As such should you wish to appeal then you must do so to POPLA as explained above.

 

3. If you choose to do nothing, we will seek to recover the monies owed to us via our debt recovery procedures and may proceed with court action.

 

Hello, yes it was an ANPR. So I should just leave this alone rather than appeal to POPLA?

[dx100uk]

Correct

[dx100uk]

Point 2 post 3

Read again...understand it

[dx100uk]

thread tidied

[zydeco]

If the charge was for leaving the site, parking on southgate park then going to Mcds it can't be anpr. Must be attendant with camera.

"Failure to mitigate" attendant should have warned you.

Also "you will be required to pay the full amount" nope, popla only binding on the ppc.

[DragonFly1967]

If the OP has identified themselves as the driver, the date of receipt of the NtK won't matter very much.

[ericsbrother]

as you have identified yourself as the driver the POFA offers you no protection. You need to read VCS v Ibotson to get up to speed with this. the argument that maccyd's is a separate place is nonsense.

 

what about the circumstance where a person goes to maccyd's and the rest of the people in the car go somewhere else in the complex, who is the contract with? If it is the driver who goes to maccyd's and then returns to their colleagues does the temporary lleaving of that part of the site cause a breach?

 

A judge has decided that it is nonsense to say that leaving a site is a breach because it is a fundamental breach of ones human rights (sounds daft but true) for free association. that menas the contract is void under para 62 of the CRA 2015

[achrixy]

If the charge was for leaving the site, parking on southgate park then going to Mcds it can't be anpr. Must be attendant with camera.

"Failure to mitigate" attendant should have warned you.

Also "you will be required to pay the full amount" nope, popla only binding on the ppc.

 

They had camera stills of me leaving the car and walking towards McDonald's. Looks like it's from an elevated, fixed position so someone must have been following me remotely

[achrixy]

as you have identified yourself as the driver the POFA offers you no protection. You need to read VCS v Ibotson to get up to speed with this. the argument that maccyd's is a separate place is nonsense. Anyway what about the circumstance where a person goes to maccyd's and the rest of the people in the car go somewhere else in the complex, who is the contract with? If it is the driver who goes to maccyd's and then returns to their colleagues does the temporary lleaving of that part of the site cause a breach?

 

A judge has decided that it is nonsense to say that leaving a site is a breach because it is a fundamental breach of ones human rights (sounds daft but true) for free association. that menas the contract is void under para 62 of the CRA 2015

 

I was the only person in the car so would this argument still work?

[ericsbrother]

Ibbotson was the only person, it doesnt mean that if you are seen heading off in a particular direction that is the sole purpose of your visit. You might have been going for a pee before going shopping but the reason is of no relevance. Their operative would ahve to watch you for the entire duration of your stay and have proof- sent to you in their NTK - that this was the case.

Stop trying to find reasons for giving up and look for the reasons to fight.

[dx100uk]

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?484971-MET-ANPR-PCN-left-site-Southgate-Park-Stansted-**CANCELLED-BY-STARBUCKS**

[ericsbrother]

there you have it, it is a one horse town so Met are screwed, you didnt leave the site.

When they get in touch again you tell them that you know this to be a fact and invite them to drop the matter entirely

[129c]

as you have identified yourself as the driver the POFA offers you no protection. You need to read VCS v Ibotson to get up to speed with this. the argument that maccyd's is a separate place is nonsense. Anyway what about the circumstance where a person goes to maccyd's and the rest of the people in the car go somewhere else in the complex, who is the contract with? If it is the driver who goes to maccyd's and then returns to their colleagues does the temporary lleaving of that part of the site cause a breach?

 

A judge has decided that it is nonsense to say that leaving a site is a breach because it is a fundamental breach of ones human rights (sounds daft but true) for free association. that menas the contract is void under para 62 of the CRA 2015

 

What does CRA stand for please.?

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

 

It stands for Consumer Rights Act [click on the initials in your post for more explanations]. If you have other questions you really need to start a new thread of your own please, you're posting on someone else's.

 

 

Best, HB

[okbhav]

How did you finally dealt with it? I am in the same situation as of today.

Your input will be valuable.

 

Regards,

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

You need to start a new thread of your own please.

 

Best, HB