Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Aaron Aadvark
    • By Aaron Aadvark 9th Mar 13, 5:49 PM
    • 231Posts
    • 409Thanks
    Aaron Aadvark
    POPLA Decisions
    • #1
    • 9th Mar 13, 5:49 PM
    POPLA Decisions 9th Mar 13 at 5:49 PM
    MSE Note:

    Hi! Please don't post any private details (yours or other peoples) on the forum for privacy reasons. Thanks!

    MSE Official Insert:

    Read our MoneySaving UK Travel & Transport guides to save more including Fight Private Parking Tickets and Parking Ticket Appeals.

    Back to Aaron Aadvark's original post....

    ----------------------------


    This thread is intended to be a compilation of all published POPLA decisions.

    Please add any decisions you are aware of.

    Please do not post requests for advice on this thread.

    Please start a new thread if you are looking advice.
    Last edited by MSE Andrea; 28-10-2016 at 9:29 AM.
Page 131
    • Edna Basher
    • By Edna Basher 6th Apr 17, 10:24 PM
    • 584 Posts
    • 1,518 Thanks
    Edna Basher
    As reported on this thread last year, POPLA ruled against us in our dispute over a ParkingEye PCN issued to our company regarding an alleged trespass at the now-infamous Montpelier Health Centre in Bristol.

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=70366547&postcount=2060

    A couple of weeks ago, we finally had our day in Court - Case Ref. C9FC0J9D heard in Darlington County Court. I'm pleased to report that we won

    The main cause of PE's downfall was their inability to prove that they had the authority to operate across the whole extent of the car park. We used pictures from PE's POPLA evidence pack to highlight to the judge that part of the car park was directly adjacent to a neighbouring pub and that that there were no PE signs in that part of the car park, thus casting doubt that that piece of the car park belonged to the Health Centre.

    Last week we received a PE cheque for £89.50 covering the cost of four and a half hours of witness time @ £19 per hour plus £4 parking. I'm sure I saw the judge give a wry smile when I explained that in order to keep costs down, I'd parked in a council car park across town rather than using the more expensive ParkingEye-controlled car park round the corner.

    Ironically, had POPLA done their job properly in the first place, ParkingEye wouldn't have been so much out of pocket.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 6th Apr 17, 10:38 PM
    • 14,947 Posts
    • 23,474 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Well done EB. Who was the legal gun that PE fielded? Did you query their Right of Audience? I bet Mesdames Ledson and Breaks were nowhere near!
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 6th Apr 17, 10:49 PM
    • 50,691 Posts
    • 64,104 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Thrilled to read that outcome, Edna Basher!

    Sounds intriguing and worth a Parking Prankster blog...
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • nigelbb
    • By nigelbb 7th Apr 17, 8:12 AM
    • 1,934 Posts
    • 2,686 Thanks
    nigelbb
    Well done Edna Basher although I am confused by this in the POPLA decision
    The case is that the vehicle was parked in the car park for 25 minutes and had only paid for two hours.
    Apart from being nonsensical I thought that this was a Health Centre were parking was only permitted for staff & those displaying a Blue Badge & not a paid car park?
    • Edna Basher
    • By Edna Basher 8th Apr 17, 12:28 PM
    • 584 Posts
    • 1,518 Thanks
    Edna Basher
    I agree - the POPLA assessment was riddled with nonsense.

    This was in the early days of the new Ombudsman Services' POPLA service when they were working through a large backlog of outstanding cases. It's clear that the assessor did not properly read our submission and simply created her assessment by copying and pasting text from a library of stock responses. Despite our complaints, POPLA refused to consider a reassessment.

    Some may say that the POPLA service is no better now than it was back then.
    • windsmurf
    • By windsmurf 14th Apr 17, 12:42 PM
    • 8 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    windsmurf
    Another non-contest! Received 19/03/17 (it's been a busy few weeks but I was keen to say thanks and pass on lessons learned):


    Dear ______

    Thank you for submitting your parking charge Appeal to POPLA.

    An Appeal has been opened with the reference __________.

    Indigo Solutions have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge.

    Yours sincerely

    POPLA Team

    Also direct from Indigo:


    Good Morning

    I am writing in relation to the above Penalty Notice.

    We acknowledge your appeal to POPLA. As part of the process we assess the decision made. As part of this assessment I have noted the POPLA code issued was not unique and upon your written request for a new code we did not provide this within the timely manner expected of our staff.

    Due to these administrative errors during the appeal process Indigo have withdrawn the case from POPLA. I can confirm that the notice has been cancelled and the case concerned has been closed on this occasion with no payment required.

    I trust the above is satisfactory and I’m sorry for any inconvenience caused
    If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us further.

    Kind Regards,

    _______

    Massive thanks to Coupon Mad and all who stepped in. A peculiar anticlimax - obviously the ticket was cancelled which is the right result but I would've welcomed a full review to see how POPLA viewed this - particularly the whole debt collection palava.

    Of note here as all other lessons are well covered by forum members elsewhere- INDIGO sending me the wrong POPLA code actually helped me in the end, adding approx an extra 40 days delays to the initial appeal process and moving towards a 6 months time out. If you receive a duplicate code, don't panic. Contact the BPA on the 28th day (your submission date) and complain that you have been sent an invalid code and dont have the opportunity to appeal. Have a cup of tea and add another 28 days from receiving a replacement code to your countdown towards a possible 6 month timeout (for byelaw cases only)

    Ridiculous that you have to go down this route when you have made best endeavours to comply and brought a ticket in the first place. System is plain broken and needs full reform IMHO. The appeals website is a shocker too - clearly designed to encourage poor submissions and in favour of the cowboys.

    Anyways, my full redacted POPLA letter on a seperate thread entitled "Indigo Southern Rail POPLA"
    (Perhaps someone with forum privileges would be kind enough to link)
    • hankhill
    • By hankhill 19th Apr 17, 6:29 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    hankhill
    UKPC non-contest
    I got a ticket from UK Parking Control (thread 72425639) for parking at some industrial estate car park in Cambridge where the sole sign had very small text, was unlit with very little ambient light on a dark winter's night, and to top it all was hidden behind a van that had been parked in front of it! They rejected all of my points when I contacted them directly with some vague hand-waving statements, but then caved in and withdrew when I (finally!) got to POPLA, as they probably knew they were bound to lose.

    POPLA email:
    Dear ___

    Thank you for submitting your parking charge Appeal to POPLA.

    An Appeal has been opened with the reference ___.

    UK Parking Control Ltd have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge.

    Yours sincerely

    POPLA Team
    • Bogadala
    • By Bogadala 22nd Apr 17, 11:56 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Bogadala
    Popla appeal refused
    Hello All.
    I am newbie here. Trying to find a solution to my frustration.
    The gist of my appeal to POPLA was as follows
    --------------------------------------------------
    *That I paid for the parking fee, which avoided loss to the parking company.
    *The Dashboard on the Rangerover is sloped/curved and the parking ticket could have slipped on to the steering, due to the air gush when the door was closed.
    *The parking ticket had no self adhesive to stick it to the dashboard.
    *I have shown the ticket to the parking attendant on my return to the car, while he was still there and he asked me to appeal.
    *My intentions were not to breach the terms and conditions of parking site, hence bought a ticket and should not be penalized with unreasonable amount.

    PEA nor POPLA could consider the circumstances and reply was as below....
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ASSESMENT DECISION was on 30/03/2017 on their website
    Unsuccessful
    Assessor summary of operator case
    The operator’s case is that the appellant failed to display a pay and display ticket.

    Assessor summary of your case
    The appellant’s case is that they purchased a pay and display ticket but it slipped down the dashboard, as the ticket did not have any self-adhesive.

    Assessor supporting rational for decision
    The operator has provided photographic evidence of the signage located around the site in question. The signage states, “Not displaying valid permit/ticket clearly on the dashboard…Parking Charge Notice is £100”. The operator has provided photographs of the appellant’s vehicle parked at the site in question. The photographs provided show the appellant’s vehicle without clearly display a pay and display ticket. The operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) as the appellant failed to display a pay and display ticket. I acknowledge the appellant purchased a pay and display ticket but it slipped down the dashboard as the ticket did not have any self-adhesive. However, from the operator’s photographic evidence of the appellant’s vehicle I cannot see a pay and display ticket displayed on the dashboard. In order for the warden to assess that the vehicle was authorised to park at the site, a pay and display ticket would need to be clearly visible in the vehicle. As it was not, the warden has issued the PCN, as they would have been unaware whether the vehicle is authorised to park at the site. POPLA’s remit is to assess whether or not the appellant has adhered to the terms and conditions of the site in question. Therefore as the appellant failed to display the ticket correctly, I am satisfied the appellant has not adhered to the terms and conditions of the site. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the motorist to ensure that when they enter a car park, they have understood the terms and conditions of parking. By remaining parked on site, the appellant accepted the terms and conditions. On this occasion, the appellant has failed to follow the terms and conditions of the signage at the site and as such, I conclude that the operator issued the Parking Charge Notice correctly.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I haven't got any debt collection letters yet. I wish to fight in the the small claims.
    Should I write to the company and tell them to file it in the court for me to defend or wait for the harassing letters to pour in.

    What I don't want is they clamping my car if parked again in any of their other controlled areas as there is a pending charge for them to collect. While the one I initially parked is closed and buildings are developed currently.

    Please could anyone be kind to advise. Appreciate your help in advance.
    Regards
    • Molts
    • By Molts 22nd Apr 17, 12:22 PM
    • 67 Posts
    • 161 Thanks
    Molts
    Clamping on private ground is illegal so no fear there. You are under no obligation to accept POPLA's decision - only the operator is. So best course of action for now is to ignore the raft of debt collector trash you will no doubt receive and wait for a "letter before claim" if it ever comes.

    Under no circumstances ignore court paperwork and come back here for advice if you need it once you receive a LBC.
    • Bogadala
    • By Bogadala 22nd Apr 17, 12:56 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Bogadala
    Thank you for your reply Molts.
    • Bogadala
    • By Bogadala 22nd Apr 17, 1:00 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Bogadala
    Just wondering if I have any ground to win the claim at all. I can see from the pictures posted on PEA website that the parking ticket is sitting on the Steering barrel casing. And of course the POPLA adjudicator has considered that I had a valid ticket, but not displayed clearly.
    Any thoughts.

    Thanks
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 22nd Apr 17, 1:30 PM
    • 14,947 Posts
    • 23,474 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Just wondering if I have any ground to win the claim at all. I can see from the pictures posted on PEA website that the parking ticket is sitting on the Steering barrel casing. And of course the POPLA adjudicator has considered that I had a valid ticket, but not displayed clearly.
    Any thoughts.

    Thanks
    Originally posted by Bogadala
    You have a case to present to a judge - he/she will decide. Everyone has a 50:50 chance at the small claims court. It's a lottery based on judge bingo, which side of bed they got out of, whether they have preconceived ideas that any car park contravention deserves censure - or whether their spouse has previously suffered at the hands of a PPC.

    PEA are small fry, and at time of writing, don't do court.

    http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Parking_and_Enforcement_Agency.html
    Last edited by Umkomaas; 22-04-2017 at 1:33 PM.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Bogadala
    • By Bogadala 25th Apr 17, 2:39 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Bogadala
    Very Helpful Info. Many Thanks.
    • AMK077
    • By AMK077 26th Apr 17, 6:03 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    AMK077
    Decision Unsuccessful :(
    DecisionUnsuccessful
    Assessor summary of operator case
    The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) because the appellant did not purchase the appropriate parking time using the correct Vehicle Registration Mark (VRM), in breach of the terms and conditions of the signage.

    Assessor summary of your case
    The appellant’s case is they was they bought a ticket but for some reason only the last part of the VRM was recorded.

    Assessor supporting rational for decision
    The operator has provided evidence from its Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system. This evidence shows the appellant’s vehicle entered the car park at 15:03 and exiting at 15:28. From this I am satisfied the appellant had remained at the site for a total time of 24 minutes. The operator has provided evidence of signage at the site. The signage states: “PAY AT METER … Enter the FULL and correct vehicle registration into the payment machine when paying the tariff … £100 Parking Charge Notice will be issued to vehicles which: … fail to purchase a valid ticket or permit” I appreciate the appellant made a payment with the expectation of purchasing parking time, entering their VRM. However, the appellant did not enter the full VRM. The operator has provided evidence of other VRMs having been entered correctly around the time of the parking event. From this, I conclude that the machine was functioning correctly. The terms and conditions specify the full VRM must be entered. They also state PCNs will be issued for failure to comply with them. Ultimately, it is the motorist’s responsibility to ensure they follow the terms and conditions. When looking at appeals, POPLA considers whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract. POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. By entering the site, the appellant accepted the operator’s terms and conditions. By remaining on the site in excess of the purchased parking time using the correct VRM, the appellant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the site on this occasion. Therefore, I can only conclude that the PCN was issued correctly
    • AMK077
    • By AMK077 26th Apr 17, 6:22 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    AMK077
    Hi, I'm looking for some advice as to whether I should pay the PCN as my POPLA appeal was unsuccessful. I paid for parking but only entered the last three digits of my VRM. I thought I had entered the full VRM, but must have pressed the keys too quickly. Many thanks in advance.

    Decision Unsuccessful
    Assessor summary of operator case
    The operator issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) because the appellant did not purchase the appropriate parking time using the correct Vehicle Registration Mark (VRM), in breach of the terms and conditions of the signage.

    Assessor summary of your case
    The appellant’s case is they was they bought a ticket but for some reason only the last part of the VRM was recorded.

    Assessor supporting rational for decision
    The operator has provided evidence from its Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system. This evidence shows the appellant’s vehicle entered the car park at 15:03 and exiting at 15:28. From this I am satisfied the appellant had remained at the site for a total time of 24 minutes. The operator has provided evidence of signage at the site. The signage states: “PAY AT METER … Enter the FULL and correct vehicle registration into the payment machine when paying the tariff … £100 Parking Charge Notice will be issued to vehicles which: … fail to purchase a valid ticket or permit” I appreciate the appellant made a payment with the expectation of purchasing parking time, entering their VRM. However, the appellant did not enter the full VRM. The operator has provided evidence of other VRMs having been entered correctly around the time of the parking event. From this, I conclude that the machine was functioning correctly. The terms and conditions specify the full VRM must be entered. They also state PCNs will be issued for failure to comply with them. Ultimately, it is the motorist’s responsibility to ensure they follow the terms and conditions. When looking at appeals, POPLA considers whether a parking contract was formed and, if so, whether the motorist kept to the conditions of the contract. POPLA cannot allow an appeal if a contract was formed and the motorist did not keep to the parking conditions. By entering the site, the appellant accepted the operator’s terms and conditions. By remaining on the site in excess of the purchased parking time using the correct VRM, the appellant failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the site on this occasion. Therefore, I can only conclude that the PCN was issued correctly
    • DoaM
    • By DoaM 26th Apr 17, 7:07 PM
    • 3,333 Posts
    • 3,375 Thanks
    DoaM
    Wrong thread for advice. But the answer to your question is No.

    If you want to debate WHY the answer is No, start a new thread please.
    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
    • Iguana En Fuego
    • By Iguana En Fuego 28th Apr 17, 1:46 PM
    • 24 Posts
    • 27 Thanks
    Iguana En Fuego
    Ethical Parking Management on BHCC land
    Link to original thread:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5590569

    POPLa Descision 18/04/2017

    The RK received the POPLa decision whilst I was on Holiday, hence delayed update to this thread. The RK and myself are thankful to the forum regulars for their help and guidance throughout.

    Decision: Successful

    Assessor Name: **

    Assessor summary of operator case

    The operator’s case is that the appellant failed to display a parking permit.

    Assessor summary of your case

    The appellant’s has questioned the operator’s authority to issue Parking Charge Notices (PCNs). The appellant does not believe the amount of the PCN is genuine pre-estimate of loss to the operator. The appellant states the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 does not apply, as it is not relevant land. The appellant states the signs on site are not prominent, clear or legible. The appellant states the operator has breached the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice.

    Assessor supporting rational for decision

    The appellant has questioned the operator’s authority to issue PCNs. Section 7.1 of the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice sets out to parking operators that “if you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent).

    The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you authority to carry out all aspects of car park management for the site you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges.”

    The operator has provided POPLA with a signed contract between itself and the landowner. While I appreciate that the contract states that the agreement began on 01 December 2014 and was only valid for 12 months, therefore I do not consider this to be sufficient proof that the operator still has the authority to issue PCNs.

    I am not satisfied that the operator has met the minimum requirements set out by the BPA Code of Practice.

    I note the appellant has raised other issues as grounds for appeal, however as I have decided to allow the appeal for this reason, I did not feel they required further consideration.

    OP Final Comment

    The appeal was won on the invalid contract, which is reassuring as the contract was presented as part of the operators evidence pack and subsequently firmly rebutted by me. It would appear that the adjudicator looked at both the original appeal and the rebuttal of the operators evidence before making their decision. I would have preferred a decision based on the some of the other legal arguments presented, but a win is a win and the RK is very happy.
    • intex310
    • By intex310 29th Apr 17, 7:35 AM
    • 23 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    intex310
    Hi All!

    POPLA decision: Successful against Premier Park Ltd.

    Assessor made it under unlit signage.

    Thank you all!

    Here's the link

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5593421#topofpage
    • AndreasA
    • By AndreasA 29th Apr 17, 10:23 AM
    • 21 Posts
    • 14 Thanks
    AndreasA
    ParkingEye at Aire Street Leeds
    Case was won!

    A huge thank you to everyone who helped!
    Link to the original thread:
    ParkingEye at Aire Street Leeds
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 29th Apr 17, 1:29 PM
    • 50,691 Posts
    • 64,104 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    ParkingEye at Aire Street Leeds
    Case was won!

    A huge thank you to everyone who helped!
    Link to the original thread:
    ParkingEye at Aire Street Leeds
    Originally posted by AndreasA
    Well done again - your thread is very interesting and useful for others. That thread is worth everyone taking the time to look at the appalling photo 'evidence' dated 2014 (and possibly allegedly altered?) evidence pack linked there.

    I am not accusing PE, I am just asking the regulars and newbies alike, to look at the mystery of the *possibly photoshopped (?)* sign that was there one minute and not the next, then at a different angle, near the P&D machine...
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

592Posts Today

5,898Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LordsEconCom: On Tuesday Martin Lewis, Hannah Morrish & Shakira Martin gave evidence to the Cttee. Read the full transcript here: https?

  • Ta ta for now. Half term's starting, so I'm exchanging my MoneySavingExpert hat for one that says Daddy in big letters. See you in a week.

  • RT @thismorning: Can @MartinSLewis' deals save YOU cash? ???? https://t.co/igbHCwzeiN

  • Follow Martin