CP Plus - Advice please

NinjaJ1

Sorry to 'bump' this but it's obviously been busy since I posted it up last night and it got shunted to page 3.
I'd appreciate someone having a read of my POPLA draft please.

Umkomaas

The key appeal point is GPEOL. You seem to have built into that paragraph the issues surrounding this, but you do need to require the PPC to justify its 'losses' by itemisation of each aspect of loss. You've said that the cost of running the business at this site like erection of signs, installation of cameras, back office functions, membership of the BPA etc are business costs, not losses, so you seem to have the fundamentals covered.

Just double-check that the PCN states breach of terms and conditions (or contravention, or similar) rather than a contractually agreed sum (when GPEOL is more 'shaky). If 'breach' is the case, then to me it looks good to go.

If submitting electronically, check you've not exceeded the word count on the POPLA appeals portal (I don't think you will have done so) as some appeals have been 'chopped off' with not all going through.

If you want to be doubly-safe, also send by snail with free proof of posting from your local PO.

Good luck.

Coupon-mad

It's looking good. I would try to improve the ANPR paragraph as it's not just about whether they maintain the cameras, you can question their entire reliability! So they can be put to strict proof about more than this:

''CP Plus Ltd are obliged to make sure the APNR equipment is in working order,''

And a small typo above, it's ANPR, not APNR.


So, if you want, plagiarise some/all of post #22 here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816165

all about ANPR including a court case and how the system does not operate in a 'reasonable, consistent and transparent manner' so breaches the BPA CoP.

Apart from that, submit it online soon (to avoid postal delays).

NinjaJ1

Brilliant - thanks to you both for your input - much appreciated.
PCN states 'in accordance with the terms & conditions......blah blah the sum of £90 is required .. blah..etc' but doesn't actually mention contravention or similar!
I will rewrite the ANPR paragraph - I actually plagiarised someone else's (including the typo!) but was never 100% happy with it.
I'll tidy that one and the GPEOL bits up a little, put it into a PDF (I did learn a lot from the 85 pages!), submit it online AND post it with a proof of posting.
Many thanks to everyone who has assisted me with this -
I do appreciate it & will post up the results when I get them.
Cheers!

Coupon-mad

If the PCN doesn't state what the contravention is then it's a breach of the POFA 2012 schedule 4 paragraph 9 and can be added as another appeal point like this, in fact I would add the 'harassment of employer' in there too:




BREACHES OF THE POFA 2012
There have been two breaches of the above law:
(a) No contravention shown on the Notice to Keeper
Schedule 4 paragraph 9 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with.
In a previous ruling, POPLA Assessor Matthew Shaw has stated that the validity of a Notice to Keeper is fundamental and it must, as with any statutory provision, comply with the Act. As the Notice was not compliant with the Act, it was not properly issued.

(b) As mentioned in my introduction above, CP Plus have continued to contact the keeper/owner even after they had the name and address of the driver. This is a fundamental breach of POFA 2012 and of the BPA CoP, serious enough to warrant sanction points. I trust the POPLA Assessor will refer this case to the BPA accordingly, once the decision is made.




Maybe add that?

Umkomaas

Look forward to hearing of a successful outcome in about 2 months time.

Once you've sent this off, forget it and have a great Christmas

NinjaJ1

Coupon-mad wrote: »

If the PCN doesn't state what the contravention is then it's a breach of the POFA 2012 schedule 4 paragraph 9 and can be added as another appeal point like this, in fact I would add the 'harassment of employer' in there too:




BREACHES OF THE POFA 2012
There have been two breaches of the above law:
(a) No contravention shown on the Notice to Keeper
Schedule 4 paragraph 9 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with.
In a previous ruling, POPLA Assessor Matthew Shaw has stated that the validity of a Notice to Keeper is fundamental and it must, as with any statutory provision, comply with the Act. As the Notice was not compliant with the Act, it was not properly issued.

(b) As mentioned in my introduction above, CP Plus have continued to contact the keeper/owner even after they had the name and address of the driver. This is a fundamental breach of POFA 2012 and of the BPA CoP, serious enough to warrant sanction points. I trust the POPLA Assessor will refer this case to the BPA accordingly, once the decision is made.




Maybe add that?

Just a brief update - I added the two paragraphs above before sending it all off to POPLA. Bearing in mind the wording of the last paragraph, you'll be delighted to learn that on 13th December, my company received yet another nasty letter from CP Plus to tell them that as they hadn't paid, another £40 admin charge had been added to the bill! Total now £130.
Are these people really that stupid?
Merry Christmas everyone! Ill keep you updated in due course.

NinjaJ1

Update - 7th March:
After not receiving anything from POPLA, I chased them by email yesterday and have just now received a reply:
My appeal has been UPHELD on GPEOL!!!:j
I'd just like to say a massive Thank You to everyone on MSE who contributed to my appeal letter and helped me to beat these cowboys. You are a great help to the British Public!
Thanks a lot :T


I'll add it to the POPLA decisions list when I've edited it down.

Coupon-mad

Well done!

Might be nice to finish the matter by sending an email to the DVLA complaining that CP Plus had no reason to get your data as keeper because their charge was not a GPEOL (attach a copy of POPLA's findings).

And a complaint email to the BPA about their use of debt collector letters when the case was with POPLA - they didn't stop work on the case so that's a breach.