POPLA Decisions

dinth1906

Long story short, i havent seen any boards with actual location code (as i found out later there are some but very small and just few of them on a very large parking lot), so eventually i Googled the number and when typing it from one app to another a made a keying error and entered 6512 instead of 9512. Genuine honest mistake. Now im planning to rely on this POPLA assessment as a proof that the correct location code was so hard to find on the parking lot that even a POPLA assessor has failed to find the correct one in the evidence pack sent by NCP

Coupon-mad

Nice plan.

Nobody has to pay just because some idiot at POPLA makes a duff decision (or any decision) because it's not independent.

No worries and no CCJ risk unless you move house and fail to tell them.

Any claim will be discontinued anyway.

fivestarsamz

Recently, I had a POPLA appeal rejected, and then, after making a complaint to POPLA about the silly decision, they came back with an even sillier response. As recommended by @yarpsnehpets , I thought I would link it here for some response.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82131196/#Comment_82131196

To summarise, the PCN was issued on Hilton Garden Inn - Heathrow T2 by Euro Car Parks. The appeal was, of course, made based on No keeper liability due to not relevant land, amongst other points. The assessor goes on to reject the points and makes claims on behalf of the operator that the PCN is indeed POFA compliant.

After making a complaint to POPLA, the person in the complaints team, Alex, responds with new points that the operator never made and makes assumptions about the relationship between the RK (company) and the driver. It is clear that POPLA is biased and supporting the operator in this case. Can anything further be done to escalate this?

yarpsnehpets

This is the letter mentioned above from Alex Roby addressing the mis-assessment by Abby Muxlow.

Thank you for your contact dated outlining the reasons why you’re unhappy with the decision that has been reached by the assessor in your appeal. This was passed to me by the POPLA team as I’m responsible for investigating complaints.

Having reviewed your correspondence, I’ve noted the crux of your complaint is that you are unhappy with the outcome reached in the assessment of your appeal; you’ve stated that the assessor misapplied the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and ignored evidence.

I’ve completed a review of the appeal and I’ll address my findings below:
Within your appeal, you claimed that the operator can’t pursue the registered keeper under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 as the site isn’t relevant land for purposes of the act. In support of your appeal, you provided a copy of the Heathrow Byelaws.

The Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 is a law that allows parking operators to transfer the liability to the registered keeper in the event that the driver or hirer is not identified.

Within PoFA 2012, it states that the act only applies on “relevant land”.
Section 3(1) defines “relevant land” as any land other than:
“(a)a highway maintainable at the public expense (within the meaning of section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980);

(b)a parking place which is provided or controlled by a traffic authority;

(c)any land (not falling within paragraph (a) or (b)) on which the parking of a vehicle is subject to statutory control”

Within its evidence file, I can see that the operator didn’t provide any rebuttal to this ground. Therefore, I can’t be satisfied that the site is relevant land for purposes of PoFA 2012.

However, I consider that the matter falls under agency liability. Having reviewed the evidence, I can see that and the driver of the vehicle was using the vehicle as a company car; the driver was at the airport hotel’s drop off zone on behalf of an airport transfer company.

It’s important to explain that companies are responsible for the actions of their agents. As this is a company vehicle provided to the driver for the purposes of carrying out their duties, the assessor should’ve considered whether ____Transfers Ltd was responsible for the charge as principal on behalf of their agent, who was driving the vehicle and isn’t known.
While I appreciate that the requirements of POFA 2012 may not have been met, the assessor should’ve considered ___ Transfers Ltd responsible as principal rather than as the keeper. Accordingly, I don’t consider a failure to follow POFA 2012 would’ve affected the outcome of this appeal.

While you’ve made reference to other, previous POPLA appeals, I must advise that POPLA assesses cases on an individual basis. As such, any external factors, such as other parking events or appeals, don’t have any bearing on our decision making.

I do recognise that the assessor’s rationale didn’t provide the level of explanation or clarity we would expect to see within our decision-making. In particular, the decision should have more clearly explained why the appeal wasn’t allowed, despite the points you raised about PoFA 2012 and relevant land. For that reason, I’m upholding this aspect of your complaint. I will ensure that appropriate feedback is provided for training and quality purposes, so that the issues identified in this review can be addressed and used to support greater clarity and consistency in future assessments.

Within your correspondence, I’ve noted that you have stated the operator ignored other vital points. I would like to reassure you that the other grounds you raised have been considered as part of this review, alongside the evidence provided by both parties during the appeal. Having done so, I am satisfied that those points don’t alter the overall position. While I have upheld the complaint in relation to the clarity of the assessor’s rationale, I remain satisfied that the outcome reached in the appeal was appropriate based on the evidence presented.

In closing, I’m 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 advice, you may wish to contact Citizens Advice at: www.citizensadvice.org.uk or call 0345 404 05 06 (English) or 0345 404 0505 (Welsh).

Yours sincerely,
Alex Roby

POPLA Complaints Team

Car1980

Nothing you can do now except write an angry email back pointing out that they are obliged to respond to every appeal point. A blanket dismissal of everything without mention is not considering an appeal, it's a pathetic excuse used to squash valid appeal points.