POPLA Decisions

Guys_Dad

Bump.

Because of the ridiculous new sticky rules,I now find this thread on page 2.

If I follow MSE logic, I have to go to the sticky thread, then down to the POPLA decisions thread, then click on last page to see if any new threads have been posted since I last looked.

Given that sticky threads are there as they are important, the warped logic of burying them in another thread that does not reflect when a sub-sticky is updated shows a victory for administration over operational efficiency.

The same applies to the other stickies and I apologise in advance for posting a comment on here rather than a result, but the aim was to bump the thread to the top page.

The_Deep

Indeed GD, this needs a re-think. Perhaps there were one or two too many stickies, but Popla results was not one of them.

bod1467

At least the NEWBIES sticky restickied.

prjohnsonnn10

agreed -cant we PLEASE get this moved back to the top somehow ?

Computersaysno

POPLA...the future.


IMO we're currently seeing the start of the end of POPLA, at least wrt cases that we get to hear about on here.


PPCs will start dropping cases before they get to POPLA stage because they know that it's these cases that 'fan the flames' of this thread/board and also PPP.


If there are no POPLA decisions to report then it starves us a little bit.


I appreciate there will be more 'PPC dropped case', but these won't be as widely reported [imo].

Coupon-mad

Smart Parking threw in the towel at POPLA:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4878998

As ever, they know when a good appeal beats them.

Coupon-mad

And Norwich Traffic Control don't bother to send evidence to POPLA either:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=86379&st=20&start=20

HTH

trisontana

Parking Prankster has just blogged about this growing trend of PPCs just giving up:-

The operators have clearly thrown in the towel on this issue and accepted that their charges cannot be justified.

However, this raises the serious concern of why these charges were ever imposed in the first place. The parking operators concerned are relying on fear and uncertainty to make their money. They know that a robust challenge will see the charge cancelled by POPLA, but know that most motorists pay up. They also rely on the fact that POPLA continually refuse to explain on their web site that a motorist can challenge a charge for breach of contract on the grounds that it is not a true pre-estimate of loss.

Coupon-mad

G24 were beaten on no GPEOL, they didn't bother with any real evidence!

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=85726&st=20&start=20

ilove1981

MSE thread "ParkingEye PCN - parking out of store hours"

[Name] (Appellant)
-v-
ParkingEye Ltd (Operator)

The Operator issued parking charge notice number [Number]
arising out of a presence on private land, of a vehicle with registration
mark [Vehicle Reg].

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.

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.

Chris Adamson
Assessor