POPLA Decisions

Oakley2702 · 31 August at 4:56PM

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82118489#Comment_82118489

On your point about the tablets, is this something you would include in a POPLA appeal? If so, where?

Coupon-mad · 31 August at 10:13PM

Front & centre, with damning photos from the foyer to show this consumer notice simply isn't prominent enough.

Car1980 · 3 September at 10:19AM

More fun and games with Popla 😂

Thank you for your email received on 20th July, which was passed to me by the POPLA team as I am responsible for responding to complaints. It is worth pointing out that before submitting an appeal, our website informs appellants that POPLA is a one-stage appeal service, and we cannot reconsider your appeal if you disagree with our decision. The purpose of the POPLA complaints process is to address any procedural errors that may have occurred during the assessment of your appeal. The crux of your complaint is that you are unhappy with the outcome of your appeal and feel that the evidence was not considered your points or the evidence provided. Having reviewed both the appeal and your complaint, I am satisfied the decision reached is appropriate based on the evidence presented and the assessor has provided a clear rationale for the outcome selected. Had I assessed this decision, I am satisfied that I would’ve also reached the same outcome. As POPLA is a one-stage process, there is no opportunity for you to appeal the decision. I am sorry that your experience of using our service has not been positive. However, POPLA’s involvement in your appeal has now ended and this response concludes our complaints process. It will not be appropriate for us to correspond further on this matter, and all further correspondence will be noted on your case but not responded to. You are of course, free to pursue this matter further, through other means, such as the Courts. For independent legal advice, please contact Citizens Advice at: www.citizensadvice.org.uk or call 0345 404 05 06 (English) or 0345 404 0505 (Welsh).
Kind regards,
Rachel Hankinson

Rachel

I don't know how to put this in words you will understand, but I will give it a go.

THE ENTRANCE SIGNAGE EXISTS BUT IS NOT VISIBLE.

THE ENTRANCE SIGNAGE FACES PARALLEL TO THE ROAD.

IT CANNOT BE SEEN BY ANYBODY ENTERING THE SITE.

IT CAN ONLY BE SEEN BY DRIVERS EXITING THE SITE.

All you have done is look at Horizon's photo of the sign. Nobody denies there is a sign.

THE SIGN CANNOT BE SEEN BECAUSE IT IS NOT FACING FORWARD.

Please show me the assessor's text where they address this specific point.

Please highlight the text in your reply that addresses this specific point.

yarpsnehpets · 3 September at 12:12PM

Rachel Hankinson is a 'serial deflector' of valid appeal points.

In other words, if you put forward a compelling appeal based on specific appeal points, Rachel will deflect the assessment away from those specific appeal points and instead comment on points which she can substantiate irrespective of the fact that the appellant never raised those specific appeal points.

I helped someone construct an appeal a year or two back.

The appeal was assessed by Rachel Hankinson.

The appeal was based on the fact that the NtK failed to meet the requirements of 9(2)(e) as the required mandatory wording / invitation to the keeper was not set out on the notice.

In her appeal assessment, Rachel immediately moved the appeal away from compliance with 9(2)(e) and moved it onto compliance with 9(2)(f). Rachel then used the fact that the requirements of 9(2)(f) could be demonstrated to deem the notice to be compliant with PoFA. The bulk of the assessment related to compliance with 9(2)(f). Compliance with 9(2)(e) was never mentioned or demonstrated despite this being the appellant's appeal point. This is the classic POPLA deflection technique - it is obvious that the are trained to do this.

dinth1906 · 8 September at 12:02PM

Popla decision after my appeal that regarding lack of signage showing actual RingGo location code on NCP parking (and eventually paying for parking using a wrong location code)