Help with Parking Eye?

Coupon-mad

I don't agree that complies - I see it as sharp practice and a way of side-stepping the rejection letter/POPLA code requirement.

Guys_Dad

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I don't agree that complies - I see it as sharp practice and a way of side-stepping the rejection letter/POPLA code requirement.

If you are right, how do you explain the quote from the POPLA site?

Does it not give the PPC a get out an a legitimate excuse for not supplying a code automatically?

How to appeal

An appeal form, containing your 10 digit verification code, should be sent by the operator with the rejection of your representations. If this form is not enclosed, the operator should be contacted to obtain one.

And, of course, it may be sharp practice and side stepping, ( not that any PPC would do that, of course) but would you bet your blouse on them not doing that?

Stroma

They must supply the code on rejection of an appeal, they can't refer people to a website, because if they don't have a computer then they have no means of going there. They should be providing information on popla on every occasion.

If they don't and many don't mention popla at all on their fake invoices or when appealed and rejected, in the case of parking eye refusing point blank to give the code on request.

There is no excuses, there is no getting around it, if the code is not given within 35 days of a rejection then it's game over. If they pursue after that then they are open for a claim against them IMO , and a complaint to the dvla and bpa. Probably both useless as parking eye are the biggest users of the dvla data link, and no matter what they do no complaint will be upheld

Stroma

Guys_Dad wrote: »

If you are right, how do you explain the quote from the POPLA site?

Does it not give the PPC a get out an a legitimate excuse for not supplying a code automatically?

How to appeal

An appeal form, containing your 10 digit verification code, should be sent by the operator with the rejection of your representations. If this form is not enclosed, the operator should be contacted to obtain one.

And, of course, it may be sharp practice and side stepping, ( not that any PPC would do that, of course) but would you bet your blouse on them not doing that?

Yes that's all fine and dandy, but what happens if somebody has no Internet? How are they supposed to know about this? The word popla is probably meaningless to somebody as it has no context, and absolutely no information of what it is.

Coupon-mad

Why on earth would a normal motorist (not on a forum) have even looked at the POPLA website? Or the BPA code of practice? No-one would, they would rely on the info supplied by the PPC and if the PPC doesn't supply a POPLA code then the PPC is stuffed IMHO.

Broadsword on pepipoo says the same - post #48 here:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=77301&st=40

There is no way a person can know to ask for a code they've never heard of.

Stroma

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Why on earth would a normal motorist (not on a forum) have even looked at the POPLA website? Or the BPA code of practice? No-one would, they would rely on the info supplied by the PPC and if the PPC doesn't supply a POPLA code then the PPC is stuffed IMHO.

Broadsword on pepipoo says the same - post #48 here:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=77301&st=40

There is no way a person can know to ask for a code they've never heard of.

I agree as for many the only source of information would be the parking companies, or maybe CAB . But we know what kind of advice they give. I think that full information on popla should be given with each invoice. That information should be written by someone independent of them, Martin Cutts I believe would be delighted to do this

Guys_Dad

Stroma wrote: »

There is no excuses, there is no getting around it, if the code is not given within 35 days of a rejection then it's game over. If they pursue after that then they are open for a claim against them IMO ,

We are all on here to help others, you c-m and other for a lot longer than I have been. Your advice has helped many, many MSE members. I find very little to disagree with in your advice on all threads.

I am simply saying that giving the opinion that if the PPC does not give a POPLA code within 35 days then it's game over is too definite. It is , as yet, an untested opinion.

Is is what should happen? Of course. But no one has given me any other interpretation for that particular escape clause I quoted above. How do you read it other than my way??

Forget the internet - I agree with your point. But if a PPC supplies exactly the same response to a motorist with the exception that instead of a POPLA code included, they wrote "If you intend to appeal to POPLA, please contact us and we will supply you with a code", then that escape clause would be valid.

I would hate for a MSE member to sit back counting the 35 days and relying wholly on the "timed out" get out, only for them to lose the chance of a POPLA appeal as it was classed as too late.

I am not saying that the PPCs would be acting in the spirit of the legislation by so doing. I am saying that the wording on the POPLA site has given them a get out. As I asked above, how else can "If this form is not enclosed, the operator should be contacted to obtain one" be applicable.

Stroma

Guys_Dad wrote: »

I am not saying that the PPCs would be acting in the spirit of the legislation by so doing. I am saying that the wording on the POPLA site has given them a get out. As I asked above, how else can "If this form is not enclosed, the operator should be contacted to obtain one" be applicable.

We are going around in circles here, if someone doesn't know what the meaning of popla is, how are they supposed to know to get a form? I give you an example, a council must supply the information to appeal to the independent adjudicator. Its simply not good enough for private parking companies not to do the same.

I know it hasn't been tested in a small claim as far as we know, but if someone goes there and tells the judge that the parking company never told me about an independent appeals service, or told me I needed a form or code to go there, a judge who be looking at this would want an explanation from the parking company.

As far as the layman is concerned in this, is that they could be thinking that the first appeal is to an independent appeals service called popla when they first contact the parking company. I really think that not many parking companies will even touch a small claim after popla in any case.

Guys_Dad

Stroma - we are not in disagreement about the information they need to supply.

It is just the fine point - the difference between including

"and here is your POPLA code to appeal" or

"and if you want to appeal through POPLA, please contact us and we will supply a code".

If all other information they supplied the motorist was the same, then that is the only point of difference.

I am saying that if a PPC used something similar to the 2nd sentence above, as some seem to be doing, they would have complied with POPLA's requirements. You are saying they would be timed out. But we just don't know as yet, and I am being more cautious than you.

I agree it should be as you say, but a PPC can claim that the motorist didn't take them up on their offer to supply a code.

c-m referred broadsword's link. In it, he wrote

"Scenario 3. the RK/Driver challenges the PCN with the PPc - 'appeal' refused but the PPC does not provide the POPLA code (this appears to be the standard operating procedure for a particular PPC with something along the lines of "......and will be put on hold for a further 14 days for you to pay up or submit any further information" - this is possibly their insurance policy to justify not giving out the POPLA code)"

I am presuming that the PPC above has not yet been suspended by the BPA or thrown out by POPLA, so I guess they are using relying on something along the lines of the escape clause I referred to.

I have actually asked POPLA about this very point, but as yet they have only automatically acknowledged my email and not clarified the point.

No need to fall out over this, though. Both trying to help others.

Stroma

They cannot use that as excuse not to submit the popla code, as I said previously if this person didn't know what further information to give. It's on the parking company to either accept or reject the appeal within 35 days.

No grey area, no messing around, it's in the code of practice that it must be either one or the other. If they fail to abide by that CoP by not giving the decision that is their problem. If it went to court it's there in black and white, you must either reject or accept the appeal within 35 days.

A judge would see it in that way. Not in some vagueness by this company