High view parking PCN (POPLA appeal rejected)

[GJKT]

Hi Every one

 

I had received a parking ticket for allegedly parking in a restricted area (client permit area) from High view parking.

 

 

to further explain,

we wanted some new carpets and went in a shop in hillsborough in sheffield which allows free customer parking.

 

 

We parked in an area where there was a board of customer parking on the wall that i parked against,

on the adjacent wall there was permit parking board.

 

 

I genuinely thought it was customer parking,

parked only to get a notice that i had parked in restricted area which was for clients only from high view parking.

 

 

I stayed there for 17 mins.

they had camera to prove i entered and stayed in what they say was a restricted area.

 

 

i appealed to them initially really not understanding difference between client & customer

saying my visit was for a genuine reason and they could cross check it with carpet shop. (my stupidity)

and it got rejected , no surprise.

 

 

I wrote to popla and giving them the explanation that the signage suggested customer parking,

and there was ambuiguity and had it been more clear i would have not parked in the area.

 

Popla has replied back saying it was still my fault to park there.

I tried uploading my evidence but the website would not allow (technical problem)

and than popla would not accept my pictures as case was submitted.

 

What do i do now. ?

 

As submission to popla, highview parking submitted a document

delineating the various signage they have,

but not mentioning that they have a misleading sign board in the restricted client area.

 

Feel the decision is unfair, as i feel there should never be misleading signs.

i dont know the laws regarding misleading signs in a private parking.

 

I have now received a notice to pay £125 in 14 days.

 

Should i take them to court ?

because i still feel my case was not fully heard by POPLA.

 

i have emails from POPLA where i have tried to convince them on allowing me to give them picture evidence

but they have rejected it.

 

ANy advice or help will be useful.

 

attached is the picture of the area and signage

[GJKT]

i also their paper work submitted to POPLA and as it contains my personal information it is best kept away from public domain. but i can send if some thinks it might help me in the case.

[honeybee13]

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

I expect the forum experts will be along later with advice for you, please bear with us until they can get here.

 

They will know what to do.

 

My best, HB

[ericsbrother]

you certainly dont want to be taking people to court but also bear in mind the POPLA decision isnt the end of the line and is not binding on you. Wait and see what Highview want to do abd use sensible arguments to rebut their next claim. If they still demand money suggest that the matter goes to arbitration. That will stop them taking court action

[GJKT]

they are demanding money. Can you detail about how arbitration will work.

are there no laws for misleading signs in parking.

It all feels unfair. but also a more disappointed from POPLA's behaviour. I would have paid straight up if i felt i was wrong. but it feels like i was conned into making a mistake.

if you know what i mean?

[ericsbrother]

Demanding things is nit the same as having a lawul requirement to pay.

 

You asked if you should take then to court regarding thie misleading signage and the answer to that is no because it hasnt caused you a loss,

 

As for complaining about POPLA's behaviour, as we havent seen your appeal or thier decision it isnt for us to comment but as I said, this does not force you to pay up,merely states to the operator that your appeal is unsuccessful and they may pursue you if they wish.

 

So, on that last point let us consider the signage. The sign give a contract that says that you may park for a maximum of 1.5 hours. It then says that you owe them £85 if you disobey a short list of conditions that include parking on the yellow lines and various other things that are not easy to discrn from the sign.

 

 

However, it doesnt appear to say that you have to pay if you park for more than 1.5 hours and makes mention of other conditions that are not expressly written into the contract on the sign. I see no mention of parking or not parking in designated areas. This means that the sign is not offering a contract but is an invitation to treat, ie it is inviting you to consider some other offer which you may then accept or decline but the important thing is that you can decide to decline to even consider this other offer.

 

Typically you get such an offer in a shop with a sign saying 50% off all items in the sale. This meansd that you have to go into the shopm see what is in the sale and then decide if youthink that the reduced price is worth considering and then either buy or walk away. the shopkeeper doesnt sue you for not buying the sale items becuse you have shown interest in them nor does this sale preveny tou from looking at and maybe purchasing items that arent in the sale so not part of this contract.

 

You also have the argumant that the wording on the signage is too small and too confusing to be considered for the offer of a contract. If I could read the exact wording that would be easier to offer an opinio on but the fact that it cannot be read speaks volumes in itself. Also, the position of any signage is important so signs at the entrance to the land carry more importance than any number scattered around regardless of waht they say.

 

In short, wait for the parking co to contact you and then come back here with a decent image of the signage and some measurment of their size so we can offer more tailored advice before you respond to them. Highview have a habit of garbling their words in most of their communications so sight of the original demand and any other correspondence would be useful

Edited February 28, 2016 by honeybee13
Paras.