A popla victory......

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.
For everthing else there's mastercard.
For clampers there's Barclaycard.

Replies

  • BASFORDLAD wrote: »
    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.

    It says:
    "The reason it wa succesful appears to be because the company did not submit any evidence to popla."

    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:
  • ILWILW
    18.3K Posts
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Why is any sort or ruling required when the tickets are just invoices and not enforceable?
    I am confused.
  • ILW wrote: »
    Why is any sort or ruling required when the tickets are just invoices and not enforceable?
    I am confused.
    Because it's a circus and a racket - the feeble and vulnerable would be pressured to pay up, and the scam (intentional misspelling) would get away with it, as they are doing now.
  • Coupon-madCoupon-mad
    100K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    ILW wrote: »
    Why is any sort or ruling required when the tickets are just invoices and not enforceable?
    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.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
    CLICK at the top of this/any page where it says:
    Forum Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
  • HO87HO87 Forumite
    4.3K Posts
    We really shouldn't forget that POPLA has absolutely no legal standing whatsoever - despite the BPA's best efforts to describe it as jealously protecting its judicial role. What complete BS. POPLA has no judicial role and if it imagines that it does then one would have to question the cause of so serious a delusion.

    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.
    My very sincere apologies for those hoping to request off-board assistance but I am now so inundated with requests that in order to do justice to those "already in the system" I am no longer accepting PM's and am unlikely to do so for the foreseeable future (August 2016). :(

    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
  • The_Slithy_ToveThe_Slithy_Tove Forumite
    3.9K Posts
    Tenth Anniversary 1,000 Posts
    ✭✭✭✭
    BASFORDLAD wrote: »
    The company were county parking enforcement agency and it was indeed someone called Shona who assessed the case.
    Shona again. Has anyone seen any evidence of anyone else doing the assessments? I only ask as there were numbers bandied around the other day claiming how there had been several thousand POPLA appeals so far. Shona must be very busy, especially as the couple of detailed responses we have seen would take a little time to put together (more than £27 worth of time :)). Could the numbers possibly be a complete fabrication?
  • ManxRedManxRed Forumite
    3.5K Posts
    ✭✭✭✭
    The numbers the BPA gave out? No, they'd never fabricate numbers, that's just not their sty-






    What? Oh.
    Je Suis Cecil.
This discussion has been closed.
Latest News and Guides