POPLA- Result now in

spacey2012

VALID Blue badge ?
No Blue badge is valid on private land.

If the charge is a loss, how many losses have they registered against profits for tax purposes.
Say 30% are unpaid, have they offset those 30% against operating profits.
I say not .
to the person making this appeal summary, note i use summary, it is of no legal standing, well in the interests of fair comment, you are a complete and utter disgrace to the legal profession.

ripped_off_driver

Abyssmal decision by someone who clearly does not have a clue. The dismissal of the VCS case was pure ignorance, the decision there ruled out the very concept of agency which she rested on as the foundation to her decision. She cannot have read the case to make such ignorant pronouncements. Or if she did she has clearly not understood it in any way. This does not read as a decision of someone who knows anything about the finer points of contract law.

Maybe not a surprise but what were we expecting for a BPA funded sham appeal body which only exists to give a figleaf of respectability to a scam industry.

Guys_Dad

Well, we now know how this adjudicator is applying her decision.

The next stage seems to me to be the crucial one.

BASFORDLAD isn't going to pay (obviously). So what will the PPC do? If they do nothing, then that's as good as saying that POPLA is a complete waste of time. I can't see that they or POPLA could allow that somehow, but it's a strange world.

If it goes to court, then it will clarify certain things.

1. What weight will the court give to POPLA adjudications?

2. Will the court accept BASFORDLAD's legal points - certainly the facts seem clear - he parked in a disabled bay, there was a clear notice warning of the charge and he doesn't dispute the actual facts.

3. If the courts overturn the decision based on his legal arguments, then that would be a brilliant precedent to be used in POPLA appeals.

Bring on the next act.

spacey2012

I would say the loss vs tax issue would be crucial in establishing it as a loss.
what kind of idiot would not offset unpaid losses against tax.
I would poke a sharp stick straight in to this area.

BASFORDLAD

Guys dad, thanks, but county courts don't set precedents.

Wheather hasbeen responds to my msg remains to be see.

spacey2012

To put it in simple terms, they are claiming the charge reflects the true cost of issuing the fake ticket.
So if it remains unpaid, they have truly lost that money.
This would be issued in to accounts as uncollected costs and offset against profits.
Would they try such a thing with the inland revenue, i would say not.
So why not, because it is not a loss, but a charge and penalty.

To be honest POPLA is bought and paid for by the crooked industry that is PPC, they are not going to bite any hands are they.
It is obviously of no legal standing, or she would be struck off the Barr for ignoring points of law.

Guys_Dad

BASFORDLAD wrote: »

Guys dad, thanks, but county courts don't set precedents.

Wheather hasbeen responds to my msg remains to be see.

I know they don't set legal precedents as such, but if they actually supported your arguments, then what they say would be most useful in the context of this forum and, of course, no POPLA adjudicator would want to see their "unbiased" adjudications being constantly turned over in court.

I know that they would not be directly involved, but the results would certainly filter back and, if sufficient were overturned, then "fit for purpose" would certainly be on the RADAR.

Equally, courts tend to be conservative, and anyone representing themselves gets a certain leeway. Bringing up earlier court decisions would influence courts who tend to be quite conservative.

Anyway, let's see Act II. :beer:

Dave_TH

I fully expected this result and being truthful so did many on here, we all want to see the next step (if hasbeen tries it on in court, but then he has to because the BPA insist he does) because only then will we stand a chance of getting an unbiased / independent view.

edward123

Would the PPC think to go straight to court now? No flaffing about with threats of DCs and discounts etc?

Guys_Dad

edward123 wrote: »

Would the PPC think to go straight to court now? No flaffing about with threats of DCs and discounts etc?

They will have to wait at least 14 days - "In order to avoid any further action by the operator, payment of the £100 parking charge should be made within 14 days."

But I guess that they will feel flushed with their POPLA win and will probably go for it.