POPLA Decisions

Car1980

Yes, but there is no such thing as a reassessment. Once the assessor has published their decision it is set in stone. Either side could suddenly magic up the most iron cast evidence, but it is inadmissible after the event.

This is what you signed up for when you ticked the T&Cs.

We've seen them admit mistakes but they rightly say they cannot the change the outcome of a decision.

This is absolutely ridiculous.

yarpsnehpets

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82146561#Comment_82146561

Just to clarify;

1. Did POPLA inform you that the matter was being re-assessed or did the re-assessment come out of the blue?
2. Where you afforded the additional opportunity to comment on the mysterious extra evidence before the re-assessment occurred?

Perdusys1955

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82146810#Comment_82146810

yes, I had an email from them saying they were reassessing due to a procedural error, email below. No, I wasn't told of any reason, just that ECP had found a procedural error, and gave an example of what that could be. The email came from the Complaints Dept. The original decision was made on 11th August, the Complaints reassessment was on 17th September.

Dear Gary Jeffries,
I write today regarding your POPLA appeal 2411466363
The parking operator has been in touch to advise us that a procedural error was made during the assessment of your appeal.
I have reviewed the assessor’s decision and I consider that a procedural error has occurred, which may change the outcome of the initial decision reached. A procedural error for example could be if we failed to allow a motorist to comment on a parking operator’s evidence pack or evidence was missed during the assessment of the case.
As such, I will complete a full review of your case and respond to you within the next 10 working days. It is important to note that financial recompense will not be awarded and my review may not change the outcome of the decision.
In closing, I thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and I apologise for any inconvenience caused.  
Yours sincerely,
Amy SmithPOPLA Complaints Team



Car1980

or evidence was missed during the assessment of the case.

Was this evidence visible to you the first time around?

Evidence missed is not the same as evidence not submitted by the operator.

The financial recompense note sounds like a tacit admission of foul play and to discourage you from action you might otherwise have taken (and still might/could).

Theoretically, lobbing in a court claim against Popla would force them to open a whole can of beans if they wanted to defend.


"A procedural error for example could be if we failed to allow a motorist to comment on a parking operator’s evidence pack"

Their example is clearly designed to demonstrate their shadiness could also apply to both sides. Except they can't fail to allow the appellant to comment because it's an automated system!

Umkomaas

In closing, I thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and I apologise for any inconvenience caused

If this came ‘out of the blue’ from POPLA, then the above doesn’t make much sense. You brought nothing ‘to their attention’! 🤦‍♂️

yarpsnehpets

There's still too many unknowns which clearly leaves the Appellant at a massive disadvantage.

Firstly, POPLA should state outright the reason for the alleged mis-assessment which is relevant to the case and not a series of ifs, buts and maybes.

Secondly, POPLA should specify exactly what the operator has drawn to their attention and explain exactly how POPLA have reasoned that the matter needs looking at again.

Thirdly, POPLA need to reveal what the mysterious evidence is and explain how it was missed.

Fourthly, POPLA need to reveal whether the Appellant was given an opportunity to comment on the mysterious evidence (ie was this evidence visible to the Appellant at the comment stage or was this evidence lost in the POPLA system somewhere meaning that the Appellant was not able to comment on it.)

Perdusys1955

I am not sure what the original PCN said, apart from saying we did not pay for the parking. It might have been in the evidence pack that they consider it a major keying error, but not being familiar with the parking code I wasn't aware of the significance of that. I have asked POPLA why I cannot see the evidence pack now, but I am still sure that I could not have just entered one letter and the machine would know I had only been there for 34 minutes.

I was not advised of the content of the procedural error no, but I think it must be something to do with the £20 reduced fee that maybethey did not notice had been offered

Perdusys1955

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82147058#Comment_82147058

So what now? How do I proceed?

yarpsnehpets

I would wait for POPLA to reply and provide you with access to the operator's evidence again.

Are you able to access the original POPLA assessment? Did you download it to a device etc?

Perdusys1955

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82147332#Comment_82147332

It doesn't appear so, and I didn't download the POPLA assessment. I do have ECP refusal of my appeal, stating I could take it to POPLA but that's all.