POPLA appeal refused, what next?

Scott1433

I recently helped a non British friend appeal to POPLA against a parking ticket. Basically he was parked outside his own garage but because his parking permit wasn't in view properly he received a ticket. The company that issued this ticket is called UK Parking Control Limited. Popla state in their letter that £100 must be paid within 14 days. What would happen if he refused to pay, do they have any powers to take him to court? We are parking ticket novices, what are our options here? Should he just pay up? Any advice would be appreciated

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

You would have helped your friend better if you had come here and got proper appeal advice. Which you would have won.I bet you didn't mention pre estimate of loss or no contract did u.

Can you post up the popla refusal wording pls

No he doesn't pay. He just ignores them from now on

Guys_Dad

POPLA should not and can not make you pay. Their adjudications are not binding on the motorist, although they are on the PPC.

Next step for the PPC is court, if they decide to push it. You should be no worse off goint there.

However, now that you have lost the first step (POPLA), then if you want our help you need to do a few things.

1. We need a bit more on the circumstances of the contravention. You have given some details. What did you write in POPLA appeal?

2. The adjudication - please post it up if you can, redacting all identifying info.

3. Most important - cease being a Parking charge novice by reading some of the threads. Start with the last page of "POPLA Decisions" sticky thread and see where you went wrong. You will need these arguments should it get to court. We can help, but you will still have to do a lot of the work yourself if you don't want to pay.

4. You MUST come back if you get a letter before claim/action from the PPC and certainly if you get any paperwork from Northampton court. From your POPLA appeal loss, they will think you are an unaided amateur and a soft win, so court papers are a real possibility.

Scott1433

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination


[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]On 10 May 2013, a vehicle with registration mark *******[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic], [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]was observed parked in ****** Gateway, without clearly displaying a valid permit. A parking charge notice (PCN) was then issued to the vehicle. [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]
[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]
The operator’s case is that the terms and conditions for parking in the car park are clearly displayed on sufficient signs throughout the site. The signage says: "Resident Parking and No Unauthorised Parking is allowed." Another term is that valid permits must be clearly displayed inside the windscreen of the vehicle in full view at all the times, with all the details clearly visible. Copies of the PCN and signage have been produced. The operator has produced photographs of the vehicle which show that no permit was displayed in the windscreen of the vehicle.

The appellant states that he is a resident and he parked outside of his own garage. He states that the operator is there to protect the spaces of residents from improper parking and to penalise the residents who park outside their own homes. The appellant states that it is unfair to pay even "1 pence" to park outside his own house. He concludes that the operator’s system is an "absolute disgrace". He enclosed his parking permit.

The operator rejected the representations, as set out in the correspondence they sent because, they state a breach of the car park conditions had occurred by parking without displaying a valid permit. They add that the onus is on the driver to observe and to comply with the parking restrictions. They state that having a valid permit is not the same as clearly displaying it. They conclude that it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that a valid permit is clearly displayed on the vehicle before leaving the vehicle.

Considering carefully all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, by not displaying a valid permit on the dashboard of the vehicle, there occurred a breach of the car park conditions to which the appellant have deemed to have accepted when he parked his vehicle in the site.

[/FONT]
[/FONT]***** *****


[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]Assessor
[/FONT][/FONT]

Guys_Dad

Yes, that one could have been won at POPLA by demanding that they produced a valid contract that gave them the right to charge motorists. You didn't even ask for that. Nor is there even the mention of a landowner agent or whether the agent had the right to offer such a contract.

No demand for them to justify their estimate of costs or how the charge was calculated.

No challenge of their signs either.

All of these would have been in one of our appeals. However, we can remedy the situation if it goes to court.

So do a bit of reading so you are up to speed and await the next move of the PPC.

When was the adjudication, by the way?

Coupon-mad

Scott1433 wrote: »

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination


[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]On 10 May 2013, a vehicle with registration mark *******[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic], [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]was observed parked in ****** Gateway, without clearly displaying a valid permit. A parking charge notice (PCN) was then issued to the vehicle. [/FONT][/FONT]



[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]The operator’s case is that the terms and conditions for parking in the car park are clearly displayed on sufficient signs throughout the site. The signage says: "Resident Parking and No Unauthorised Parking is allowed." Another term is that valid permits must be clearly displayed inside the windscreen of the vehicle in full view at all the times, with all the details clearly visible. Copies of the PCN and signage have been produced. The operator has produced photographs of the vehicle which show that no permit was displayed in the windscreen of the vehicle. [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]The appellant states that he is a resident and he parked outside of his own garage. He states that the operator is there to protect the spaces of residents from improper parking and to penalise the residents who park outside their own homes. The appellant states that it is unfair to pay even "1 pence" to park outside his own house. He concludes that the operator’s system is an "absolute disgrace". He enclosed his parking permit. [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]The operator rejected the representations, as set out in the correspondence they sent because, they state a breach of the car park conditions had occurred by parking without displaying a valid permit. They add that the onus is on the driver to observe and to comply with the parking restrictions. They state that having a valid permit is not the same as clearly displaying it. They conclude that it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that a valid permit is clearly displayed on the vehicle before leaving the vehicle. [/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]Considering carefully all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, by not displaying a valid permit on the dashboard of the vehicle, there occurred a breach of the car park conditions to which the appellant have deemed to have accepted when he parked his vehicle in the site. [/FONT][/FONT]


***** *****


[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic][FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]Assessor[/FONT][/FONT]

What a terrible POPLA appeal and a terrible waste. He would have won if he'd asked here.

Never mind, he can now of course go into 'ignore mode' because POPLA is not binding on motorists. He just needs to open all the threatograms to check what they are and who from; ignore stuff from debt collectors (but keep it just in case) and if he gets a Letter before Action from the PPC themselves, or small claim paperwork he must not ignore that.

People have ignored fake PCNs and the ensuing debt collector drivel junk mail for years and years; I have had three myself over the years and never yet have had to try a POPLA appeal (one day I will get the chance!). And obviously nothing happened except a series of frantic hysterical letters! Ignoring a fake PCN is perfectly OK as long as he's sensible enough not to bin the letters, and to act quickly to get advice here if he gets a LBA or small claims papers.

Next time tell him to get advice here first. That was a super-daft POPLA appeal, a rant gets you nowhere.

Umkomaas

The other point is what does your friend's lease/freehold paperwork say regarding their legal rights to park on their (leased or own) land?

I can't even imagine some PPC arriving on our small estate and suddenly sticking up notices about when, where, how I display some bit of their paperwork in order to park on MY land that I own and for which I paid serious money.

This is mine, now FRO!

Scott1433

I didn't ask for anything because I don't have any experience in this field. Somebody asked to to write a letter in English because they have only basic English skills and that is what I did. But when it comes to rules and regulations, what you should and should not say, I have no idea. The parking ticket was issued on the 10th of May, the appeal was sent within a week, we only received a reply on the 19th of August. The reply states £100 must be paid within 14days. It makes me laugh how they can set time limits on things, but they are allowed to take 3 months to reply to the appeal

Scott1433

At least I know where to come in future, if I feel like being told off.

Stroma

He doesn't need some poxy piece of paper to park in land you own/lease, just ignore ukpc as they never do court. If by chance they actually grow a pair of balls come back here for help in defending a small claim.

Stroma

Scott1433 wrote: »

At least I know where to come in future, if I feel like being told off.

Not told off but helped and in future you know what to do.