Popla Website

AlexisV

I see that motorists will be specifically barred from appealing on the grounds that "the charge was excessive", except on the grounds that the amount of the charge exceeded that stated on the signage: http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS/POPLA_Appeal_Form,_Notes_and_Combined_Checklist_-_Sept_2012.pdf

The four 'grounds for appeal' will be as follows (brief extract):
"The vehicle was not improperly parked
e.g. that the vehicle was not parked where stated on the parking charge notice; that you believe you were still within the time you paid for; that the
voucher was clearly displayed or that the conditions were not properly signed. However, the fact that you did not see the sign; that you bought a voucher but it fell down, that you did not see the bay markings or that you did not realise that you could not park where you did are not valid grounds of appeal.
The parking charge (ticket) exceed the relevant amount
e.g. that you are being asked to pay the wrong amount for the parking charge or that the charge has already been paid. However, the fact that you think that the charge is excessive is not a valid ground of appeal.
The vehicle was stolen
e.g. that the vehicle was improperly parked after being stolen. However, the fact that someone else was driving your vehicle, for example a family member, friend or colleague, is not in itself a valid ground of appeal. The fact that you told the driver that they could only use your vehicle on condition they did not get any parking tickets is not a valid ground of appeal.
I am not liable for the parking charge
e.g. that you had sold the vehicle before, or bought it after, the alleged improper parking. However, the fact that you do not think you should have to pay the parking charge or the fact that you had paid to park (even if, for example, the voucher was not clearly displayed) are not valid grounds of appeal.

The Assessor has no power to allow an appeal simply because of mitigating circumstances."

I also see that Caroline Shepherd, the chief parking adjudicator for England and Wales, has refused to have any involvement with POPLA on the grounds that it is essentially controlled by the BPA: http://www.penaltychargenotice.co.uk/private-land-enforcement/

The mist is now beginning to clear.

As it appears the only possible grounds for 'appeal' are if the PPC made some sort of unlikely administration error, there are very few circumstances under which there would be genuine cause to make use of this 'service'.

BASFORDLAD

AlexisV wrote: »

The mist is now beginning to clear.

As it appears the only possible grounds for 'appeal' are if the PPC made some sort of unlikely administration error, there are very few circumstances under which there would be genuine cause to make use of this 'service'.

Seems a complete waste of time then

i wonder who dreamt up the appeal guidelines up

What a joke

tospig

Can you not just appeal on one of the 'four grounds', knowing full well it won't succeed, but will still cost the PPC, and then just ignore the outcome?

BASFORDLAD

tospig wrote: »

Can you not just appeal on one of the 'four grounds', knowing full well it won't succeed, but will still cost the PPC, and then just ignore the outcome?

Of course you can

It just seems so narrow

surfboy1

"if you appeal to POPLA, which is independent of both the operator and the

British Parking Association, an impartial Assessor will consider your case."


This taken of the POPLA website
However POPLA are not independent of the BPA are they?.

bazster

AlexisV wrote: »

The mist is now beginning to clear.

As it appears the only possible grounds for 'appeal' are if the PPC made some sort of unlikely administration error, there are very few circumstances under which there would be genuine cause to make use of this 'service'.

I'm not convinced that's the real form. I can't see how you navigate to it from the BPA home page, so it is possibly only on their web server by accident. And it's so amateurish it could just be wishful thinking by someone at the BPA.

However, if it is the real form it flies directly in the face of what the minister Norman Baker said:

It is intended that Independent Appeals Service will be able to rule, on a case-by-case basis, whether a parking operator has behaved reasonably and within relevant consumer protection legislation. Consideration will be given to the formation and existence of a contract to park on private land, taking into account relevant consumer protection law, such as in relation to the signage at the car park and the terms and conditions being relied upon. The Independent Appeals Service will also be able to assess whether or not a particular parking charge arises from a genuine pre-estimate of loss or if it includes an element of unenforceable penalty.

ManxRed

So you can't appeal on an actual point of law then??

'I am appealing because the PPC has no legal status enabling it to even form a contract with me in the first place, let alone pursue me for breach of it."

Appeal rejected!

Would such an appeal still cost them £32??

ripped_off_driver

Surely you can always appeal on the grounds that the charge is excessive - if there is no contract etc then the charge should be 0.

But if this is the real document then there are major concerns.

"However, the fact that you did not see the sign ... are not valid grounds of appeal."

!!!!!!. In the words of John McEnroe "you cannot be serious". If you did not see the sign how can you have entered into a contract? If you did not enter into a contract how are you liable to pay anything? This is pure !!!!!!!!.

"However, the fact that you think that the charge is excessive is not a valid ground of appeal."

This has to be a joke. Hundreds of years of contract law lead me to thinking this, you plonker.

The new "independent "POPLA appeal service funded by the British Parking Association. The clue is there somewhere.

dggar

Appologies if this has already been dealt with.

If after Oct 1st I get a PPC ticket and I appeal to the PPC and, as expected, it is rejected by the PPC I then appeal to POPLA.

Are POPLA duty bound to accept my appeal to them (and charge the PPC £32) or can they reject it as "frivolous", "without grounds" etc. without starting a full appeal?


Hope my question is clear.

The_Slithy_Tove

dggar wrote: »

Appologies if this has already been dealt with.

If after Oct 1st I get a PPC ticket and I appeal to the PPC and, as expected, it is rejected by the PPC I then appeal to POPLA.

Are POPLA duty bound to accept my appeal to them (and charge the PPC £32) or can they reject it as "frivolous", "without grounds" etc. without starting a full appeal?

In light of Alexis' post above, it seems that most appeals are likely to be in this category. They wouldn't necessarily have to accept it, if it doesn't fall within their narrowly defined criteria, and it may be that the PPC is only charged if it passes that first test. However, it will still cost POPLA time and effort to process such claims. If the system can be buried under a flurry of appeals that don't meet their criteria, so much the better.