IMPORTANT REMINDER: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information. If you are uploading images, please take extra care that you have redacted all personal information.
NEW BLOG. Featuring tips and pics from pet owners of the MSE Forum, we present to you Homemade pet toy ideas. Take a look
A popla victory......
BASFORDLAD
Forumite 2.4K Posts
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=76355
The company were county parking enforcement agency and it was indeed someone called Shona who assessed the case.
This is what was said. Short and sweet.
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination. This is what was said.
The Appellant submits that he is not liable because he displayed a permit and did not know that it was only valid for Phase 1 Car Park, as none of the signs state that certain permits are only valid for certain areas, and the differing areas are not marked either.
The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, or put forward any evidence to show that the Appellant did not have a valid permit or even that one is required at the unspecified location.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
The company were county parking enforcement agency and it was indeed someone called Shona who assessed the case.
This is what was said. Short and sweet.
Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination. This is what was said.
The Appellant submits that he is not liable because he displayed a permit and did not know that it was only valid for Phase 1 Car Park, as none of the signs state that certain permits are only valid for certain areas, and the differing areas are not marked either.
The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, or put forward any evidence to show that the Appellant did not have a valid permit or even that one is required at the unspecified location.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
For everthing else there's mastercard.
For clampers there's Barclaycard.
For clampers there's Barclaycard.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides
Replies
It says:
Good, but not good enough. We need to beat POPLA at their mind-boggling, law-defying reasoning that charges are due, NOT when the PPC muppets cannot find the 'Send' button on their PC.
Still, a good result. But POPLA probably will use it to demonstrate they are not all pro-PPC and do humour an occasional driver.
:money:
I am confused.
So were the Government, by the spin coming from the BPA all through the reading of the Bill that then became the Protection of Freedoms Act. The BPA even got the number of cases that went to small claims very badly wrong but still convinced the Govt that they needed to give the parking 'industry' a sweetener when banning clamping. Otherwise the poor uneducated ex-clamper crims would have had to go back to signing on, or door work, or impersonating the back end of a bus.
CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
The reality is that POPLA was created for a purpose. Contrary to the puff that the BPA and its fellow travellers threw into the air prior to POPLA coming out of the fledging pits of Haywards Heath there was an independent, low-cost, ready-made, countrywide tribunal service already available to PPC's. Its called the Small Claims Court.
The problem with the SCC is that as a matter of course the real legal basis for PPC invoices is examined. That doesn't suit PPC World who, for the sake of a very large cashflow, cannot allow its tenuous base to be questioned as has happened in an increasingly regular way. As was predicted POPLA has adopted the approach that such invoices have a substantial legal basis and are assessing cases with this presumption in mind.
In this respect POPLA is being used as a means of hoodwinking the public.
For those seeking more detailed advice and guidance regarding small claims cases arising from private parking issues I recommend that you visit the Private Parking forum on PePiPoo.com
What? Oh.