BPA advising members they can ignore POPLA

hoohoo

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Protection-of-Freedoms-Act/Clamping-and-towing-ban-FAQs

Q. What can I do if I disagree with the decision of the Independent Appeals Service

A. Ultimately everyone will always have the right of redress through the Courts and this cannot be taken away.

It seems as though the BPA are advising their members that they can ignore POPLA. Is this correct? I thought the whole point of POPLA was that it was binding on the PPC.

ManxRed

One has to wonder what the point of POPLA is? Motorists ought to ignore it, and now BPA members can ignore it.

Is there any point to it at all?

SodG24

To be honest the court route was always going to be the backstop even after POPLA. The good thing is that, should a case that's been upheld by POPLA go to court then it's not going to look too good on the PPC AND it's cost them £32 !!!!

peter_the_piper

This does contradict with their version of the drivers position.

Parking on private land is managed under the law of contract or tort of trespass and only the driver can enter into a contract or commit the act of trespass. The Protection of Freedoms Act does not change this principle. Nor does it change the legal right to justice through the Courts. Motorists will always have the right of redress through the Courts and this cannot be taken away. However, the Government has insisted that the decisions of the Independent Appeals Service must be binding on the operator. This can be achieved through the AOS Code of Practice.
In requiring the BPA to develop an Independent Appeals Service, Government placed five conditions on the service:
a) That it be free to the motorist
b) That it must be funded by the private parking industry
c) That it is binding on operators
d) That it is independent and seen to be independent
e) That it is available for all tickets issued by a member of an ATA

Why not ask them, OP, why they contradict each other.

halibut2209

Fuss over nothing. All that is being said is that POPLA does not mean you cannot then go to court. This is absolutely true. Anyone can sue anyone for anything.

However, all the defendant would need to say is that POPLA said to cancel the ticket, and this is binding. Case would be dismissed instantly with a slap on the wrist (or more) to the PPC

Billtheboy

Well what a farce - this is ridiculous and It would seem that the idea of ALL this is an exorcise in additional paperwork for everyone concerned.

Like having a watchdog that can yap but has no teeth, Yeah you can pet him hes harmless.

The only upside is it costs the PPC money - every cloud......and all that.

Coupon-mad

I think a few PPCs will fall foul of this the other way. I bet in the future we see one of the occasional 'punts' at Small Claims, only to find that the AOS member PPC never informed the motorist about POPLA (at all, or adequately).

Could be very persuasive indeed when pointed out to any judge that a PPC hasn't followed due process within their own industry CoP - and we have seen several PPCs not mentioning POPLA until prodded with a sharp stick!

taffy056

For example an aos ppc never gives information about popla in their refusal via email or letter, they then pass it onto a debt collector to harass someone for money. So should a complaint then be submitted to the dvla on this ?

Coupon-mad

taffy056 wrote: »

For example an aos ppc never gives information about popla in their refusal via email or letter, they then pass it onto a debt collector to harass someone for money. So should a complaint then be submitted to the dvla on this ?

Yep that's what I am thinking.

Maybe we should let these PPCs dig their own hole rather than tell posters to ask for the POPLA Code. Maybe we should tell people with no POPLA Code offered after appeal rejection, to wait for the first threatogram and then COMPLAIN to the DVLA/BPA that POPLA was not offered and as such the PPC is now too late - so must cancel the PCN as the process followed by the PPC has broken the BPA CoP.

taffy056

Yes you put it in a much better than me lol, think we will get this scenario soon

peter_the_piper

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yep that's what I am thinking.

Maybe we should let these PPCs dig their own hole rather than tell posters to ask for the POPLA Code. Maybe we should tell people with no POPLA Code offered after appeal rejection, to wait for the first threatogram and then COMPLAIN to the DVLA/BPA that POPLA was not offered and as such the PPC is now too late - so must cancel the PCN as the process followed by the PPC has broken the BPA CoP.

A bit like not asking for paperwork when picking the car up after being towed by a council.