POPLA Decisions

pakefield

Appeal against Parking Eye allowed. No evidence was submitted by PE.
Assessor - Shehla Pirwany

Many thanks for the template letter - massively appreciated.

Having reviewed the local planning authority's website, PE also reported for failing to obtain consent for signage and cameras in heritage conservation area. Will keep you posted on outcome.

RatherBeKnitting_2

Followup to my post #1264 above, Mother in law received her letter from POPLA. They allowed the appeal.

No evidence submitted by PE.

Thanks all!

Lunamoon86

PCN received from Left Bank, Spinningfields, manchester city centre by ANPR Ltd.
Pursued appeal through POPLA, appeal was allowed on grounds of

"It is the appellant’s case that the amount of the parking charge notice does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss."

Assessor from POPLA - Amber Ahmed

Thank you all.

Bradden

25 July 2014

UK Car Park Management Limited (Operator)
The Operator issued parking charge notice number

---

arising out of a presence on private land, of a vehicle with registration mark

---

.

The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.

The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.

The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

25 July 2014

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued
incorrectly.

The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

Shehla Pirwany
Assessor

Original thread:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4876134

trisontana

CP Plus lose on GPEOL:-

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=91983&st=20&start=20

Interesting comment from the assessor:-

As the Appellant has raised the issue of the charge not being a genuine pre-estimate of loss, the onus is on the Operator to prove that it is. The Operator has produced a breakdown of costs that they incur in managing the site and breaches of the terms and conditions of parking, however, there appear to be multiple layers of unnecessary checks and balances included in their costs, which do not necessarily flow from the Appellant’s breach.

I have looked at all of the evidence and have decided to allow this appeal on the basis that the Operator has failed to prove that the parking charge amount is a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

109

POPLA appeal allowed against MET parking.
McDonalds West Bromwich

The operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.
Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

Shehla Pirwaney
Assessor.

Won thanks to all the information on this forum,

k599rag

Parking Eye lose again at POPLA.

The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.
The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.
The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.
The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4986110

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

It is the Appellant’s case that the parking charge notice was issued incorrectly.

The Operator has not produced a copy of the parking charge notice, nor any evidence to show a breach of the conditions of parking occurred, nor any evidence that shows what the conditions of parking, in fact, were.

Accordingly I have no option but to allow the appeal.

Shehla Pirwany
Assessor

Udar79

Many thanks all for the advice.

July 2014
Popla appealed against G24
Salford shopping city

The Appellant has asked to see proof that the Operator has the authority to issue parking charges. The Operator has failed to provide a copy of the contract between themselves and the landowner to show that they have the authority to issue parking charge notices and therefore I have no evidence before me to refute the Appellant’s submission. The onus is on the Operator to prove their case against the Appellant and on this occasion they have not done so.
Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.
Nozir Uddin
Assessor

Dee140157

Ooh it's good to see an appeal granted on something other than no GPEOL or PSDSU.

Computersaysno

Dee140157 wrote: »

Ooh it's good to see an appeal granted on something other than no GPEOL or PSDSU.

What are you on about??