CP PLUS - Parking Charge - Seeking assistance from the experts

[zydeco]

on another thread from ericsbrother,

I suggest sending your appeal to POPLA by post because if you submit online you cannot add to anything already sent when you receive CPP's submissions as it will be flagged as being too late. the ordinay post allows you to rebut their claims if they are trying to claim things that are not true

[ericsbrother]

When you appeal to POPLA make sure that the first grounds for appeal is that CPP have failed to say on what grounds your appeal to them was rejected bearing in mind that their claim is not compliant with the PoFA and is thus an abuse of process.

The use the grounds of 1. non-compliance- that CP Pluse are timed out for keeper liability under the PoFA

2 lack of contract between CPP and the landowner,you put it to strict proof that that they produce an contract thta allows them to make claims in their own name that is signed by the landowner and not another party that has no legal interest or authority.

3 lack of planning permission for the signage that they rely upon to form contracts (they normally forget to appl;y for PP, which makes the signs illegal)

4 amount claimed is not GPEOL and therefore unlawful penalty

[armadillo71]

Well I tried to get clarification of this thread - post45.

 

But post 46 is not in chronological order, and DrJolly you cannot be the RK if the DVLA have given zenith as RK to CP+, who have in turn given your/your company name to CP+ .

 

You wrote to CP+ and say you didn't give your name and address but they wrote back to you...

 

They state that they are not using the POFA so your name and address must have been given as the driver... ?

 

You have a POPLA code so at the minimum your appeal should include;

 

1. Proof, through sight of contract , that CP+ have lawful authority to issue and pursue parking charge notices at the site in question.

 

2. Proof that the charge is not punitive.

 

If you can clarify who they are holding liable for the charge ( driver/keeper/registered keeper), that would help further.

[DrJolly]

Hi all,

 

You have been fantastic so far and I am endlessly in your debt.

 

Questions as follows:

 

Should i include copies of CPP received documentation?

Should i include copy of my appeal to CPP?

Should i include documentation from Zenith regarding the car policy? (all employees able to drive the cars?)

 

Please could you also review and comment on the following:

 

Name & Address

Name & Add

Postcode

07/08/15

 

Good day, to whom this may apply,

POPLA reference: xxxxxxx

 

I wish to appeal against a parking charge issued by CP PLUS, as the company has made an unlawful attempt to claim compensation.

 

Time frame of events:

The driver of this vehicle was captured at the MOTO Birch West services from 05/05/15 12:02 to 05/05/15 14:54 by an ANPR camera.

Date of notice: 04/06/15

Have CP Plus been in contact with Zenith (Company Car Leaser)?

If so, have they advised CP PLUS to contact directly with (registered keeper)?

 

It is questionable, therefore:

1. Who is being held liable for this claim - driver/keeper/registered keeper?

2. Where is the proof, through sight of contract , that CP+ have lawful authority to issue and pursue parking charge notices at the site in question.

3. Where is the proof that the charge is not punitive?

4. In addition to the above, CPP have failed to say on what grounds my enclosed appeal to them was rejected, bearing in mind that their claim is not compliant with the PoFA and is thus an abuse of process.

 

Furthermore:

1. The timeframe above is not within compliance and CP Plus are timed out for keeper liability under the PoFA.

2. I am unaware of the driver at the time and there is no liability on my part under the PoFA, nor in common law tort. Under company policy, any employee may drive any car within the lease scheme.

3. There is a lack of contract between CPP and the landowner, I put it to strict proof that that they must produce a contract that allows them to make claims in their own name and that this is signed by the landowner and not another party that has no legal interest or authority.

4. There is a lack of planning permission for the signage that they rely upon to form contracts.

5. Lastly, the amount claimed is not GPEOL and therefore an unlawful penalty.

 

Please could you review the above and pass judgement accordingly.

 

Regards,

 

First Name / Surname

[ericsbrother]

change the questions to statements so say I do not believe that CPP have authority for..... and put it to proof by sight of contract

Make them provide the evidence to POPLA because if you ask for it in this way and CPP dont provide it their claim will automatically fail because they havent shown any right to make the claim. Leave it as a question and they could avoid having to provide proof.

[DrJolly]

Hi all,

 

Posting this within the next hour, please let me know if changes are required:

 

Good day to whom this may apply,

 

POPLA reference: xxxxxxxx

 

I wish to appeal against a parking charge issued by CP PLUS, as the company has made an unlawful attempt to claim compensation.

 

Timeframe of events:

 

The driver of this vehicle was captured at the MOTO Birch West services from 05/05/15 12:02 to 05/05/15 14:54 by an ANPR camera.

Date of notice: 04/06/15

 

CP Plus has not made contact with the vehicle’s Company Car Leaser. Therefore, evidence must be provided by CP PLUS as to how they have made contact directly with the registered keeper.

 

Therefore:

 

1. I do not believe CP PLUS at are right to hold me liable for this claim.

2. I do not believe, through sight of contract , that CP+ have lawful authority to issue and pursue parking charge notices at the site in question.

3. I do not believe the charge is punitive.

4. In addition to the above, CP PLUS have failed to say on what grounds my enclosed appeal to them was rejected, bearing in mind that their claim is not compliant with the PoFA and is thus an abuse of process.

 

Furthermore:

 

1. The timeframe above is not within compliance and CP PLUS are timed out for keeper liability under the PoFA.

2. I am unaware of the driver at the time and there is no liability on my part under the PoFA, nor in common law tort.

3. Under company policy, any employee may drive this, or any car within the lease scheme.

4. There is a lack of contract between CPP and the landowner, I put it to strict proof that that they must produce a contract that allows them to make claims in their own name and that this is signed by the landowner and not another party that has no legal interest or authority.

5. There is a lack of planning permission for the signage that they rely upon to form contracts.

6. Lastly, the amount claimed is not GPEOL and therefore an unlawful penalty.

 

Please could you review the above and pass judgement accordingly.

 

Regards,

[DrJolly]

I didn't end up posting it, so still have time to make amends today/tomorrow.

[DJ67]

You wrote 'I do not believe the charge is punitive' when I think that you meant to sai it 'IS punitive'

[DrJolly]

Thank you for ponting this out.

 

I have amended to: I believe the charge is punitive and require proof otherwise

[estellyn]

Personally I would change 'I am unaware of the driver at the time' to something like 'There is no liability on my part under the PofA to identify the driver at the time'

 

Best not to make statements that are untrue.

[DrJolly]

Thank you and confirm changed to: There is no liability on my part under the PofA to identify the driver at the time, nor in common law tort.

[DrJolly]

I will be posting this tomorrow, please let me know if anyone can see any further amendments!!!!