POPLA Decisions

beamerguy

As such, I cannot determine whether the operator has authority to carry out all aspects of car park management for the site.

WELL DONE

How many UKPC car parks are like this ????

Bear in mind that UKPC are approved BPA members
That tells you everything ??

Umkomaas

@DJ_Davy - well done. :T

As such, I cannot determine whether the operator has authority to carry out all aspects of car park management for the site.

Well, give UKPC some grief in return by following my suggestion a couple of posts up from this one and ask that the DVLA carries out an investigation. Simple email to them should be enough to force them to do something, it will be interesting to see their first response.

I think everyone who gets a successful appeal on 'No Landowner Authority' should start rocking the DVLA boat.

andreihoff

Operator: One Parking Solution

The Assessor has considered the evidence provided by both parties and has determined that the Appeal be Allowed.

The Operator should now cancel the parking charge.

Reasons for the Assessor’s determination: In this case the operator has told me that it considers the appellant the driver as they had the PCN details to submit an appeal.

I do not consider this to be the case. The driver may have handed the PCN to the appellant who has identified as the keeper to the operator and to POPLA. Therefore, I must consider the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
I would expect the operator to have requested the keeper details from the DVLA and issue a notice to keeper. As this has not been done, then it can only hold the driver of the vehicle liable for the charge.
As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is the driver and therefore liable for the charge.

No other grounds of appeal need to be considered.

Fruitcake

That's a good decision. Could you post the assessor's name and the PoPLA appeal number please. This will help others in the same situation.

Please also help us by complaining to your MP about this unregulated scam.

… and what a waste of £27 quid plus VaT by the scammers who tried to save themselves £2.50 by not contacting the DVLA. Morons.

Umkomaas

In this case the operator has told me that it considers the appellant the driver as they had the PCN details to submit an appeal.

Doh. :doh:

Numbnut PPC falls right down the man-trap. Sweet, heh heh!

beamerguy

Well done :beer:

Never forget that this scammer, One Parking Solution,
is an approved member of the BPA.

Despite the BPA saying they are driving standards upwards,
scammers like this drag the BPA downwards into the sewer

ML_123

Thanks for all advice, however CEL are still hounding me:

Operator Civil Enforcement Limited
POPLA assessment and decision
16/10/2018

Verification Code
1412338518

Decision Successful
Assessor Name Alexandra Roby
Assessor summary of operator case
The operator’s case is that the motorist exceeded the maximum parking time permitted.

Assessor summary of your case
The appellant’s case is that he was not allowed a grace period at the beginning and end of his parking contract. He states that he was with his disabled wife and his poorly daughter. The appellant has provided evidence of his wife’s blue badge to support his appeal. The appellant states that the signs in this car park are not prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces and there is insufficient notice of the sum of the parking charge itself. The appellant states that there is no evidence of the operator’s landowner authority. He has put the operator to strict proof of full compliance with the British Parking Association (BPA) Code of Practice. The appellant believes that the operator has failed to comply with Data Protection and the ICO Code of Practice. The appellant believes that the operator has not complied with Section 20.5a of the BPA Code of Practice. The appellant states that the Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) system is neither reliable nor accurate. The appellant states that the signs fail to transparently warn drivers of what the ANPR data will be used for.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
The appellant has identified himself as the driver of the vehicle on the day of the parking event, and therefore, I am considering the appellant’s liability for the Parking Charge Notice (PCN). While I acknowledge that the appellant has raised a number of grounds for appeal, my report will focus solely on landowner authority as this supersedes the other aspects of the appeal. Section 7.1 of the BPA Code of Practice outlines to operators: “If you do not own the land on which you are carrying out parking management, you must have the written authorisation of the landowner (or their appointed agent). The written confirmation must be given before you can start operating on the land in question and give you the authority to carry out all the aspects of car park management for the site that you are responsible for. In particular, it must say that the landowner (or their appointed agent) requires you to keep to the Code of Practice and that you have the authority to pursue outstanding parking charges”. The operator has not provided any evidence in response to this ground of appeal. Ultimately, the burden of proof lies with the operator to show that the appellant has not complied with the terms and conditions of the car park. While I acknowledge the operator has provided sufficient evidence of the terms and conditions of the car park, it has not provided any evidence of its landowner authority. As such, I am unable to establish whether the operator has the authority to issue PCNs for this car park. Upon consideration of this evidence, I cannot confirm that the PCN has been issued correctly. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.

beamerguy

ML_123 ..... well done.:beer:

CEL still hounding you ??? tell them to F-OFF, pathetic idiots

CEL are just one of the scammers approved by the BPA

DJ_Davy

Looks like they are already being investigated. Cant post a link, due to the forum rules, but a quick search on Google brings up a story on the Independent's website saying that UKPC have been suspended by the DVLA over allegations of 'data misuse'. So not sure how they can still be issuing tickets?

Umkomaas wrote: »

@DJ_Davy - well done. :T


Well, give UKPC some grief in return by following my suggestion a couple of posts up from this one and ask that the DVLA carries out an investigation. Simple email to them should be enough to force them to do something, it will be interesting to see their first response.

I think everyone who gets a successful appeal on 'No Landowner Authority' should start rocking the DVLA boat.

Umkomaas

DJ_Davy wrote: »

Looks like they are already being investigated. Cant post a link, due to the forum rules, but a quick search on Google brings up a story on the Independent's website saying that UKPC have been suspended by the DVLA over allegations of 'data misuse'. So not sure how they can still be issuing tickets?

Old news now. Done and dusted, UKPC let loose once again. How many times do they need suspending?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3229165/Is-PROOF-private-parking-firms-scamming-motorists-Drivers-say-timings-photos-doctored-legally-parked-cars-issued-fines.html