POPLA Adjudicators' Consciences

Umkomaas

Given that most adjudicators have been in their jobs for the best part of a year now (some more) and each will, no doubt, have upheld appeals on the basis of no GPEOL, they must surely know that in 99.99% of cases, none of the PPCs are legally entitled to any of the monies they are claiming.

I wonder how they sleep at night, having rejected an appeal from a less well informed motorist, who puts forward a very plausible and understandable mitigating account of their reasons for 'breaching the PPCs' (made up) rules', knowing full well that had the motorist uttered just the acronym GPEOL, they could have spared them continuing anguish at the hands of the PPC and their hired-hand debt collectors/LPC lawyers'.

Surely there must be enough POPLA 'case law' now to confirm to them the full nature of this mirage?

Coupon-mad

I have thought the same. How can they read and turn down an appeal from a little old lady about the very same scumbag PPC that they know full well has no consideration of GPEOL in their charges?

Aaron_Aadvark

Indeed

POPLA is just an exercise to test whether the motorist has access to legal knowledge rather than being any test of the 'fairness' of the charge.

I'm waiting for my POPLA code for overstaying two minutes.

I know full well (as does the parking company and the BPA Ltd) that £90 cannot be justified for a two minute overstay. The reason for the short overstay and the (supposed) loss to the parking company are the same whether I utter the magic word "GPEOL" or explain why I overstayed two minutes. Yet the POPLA result will be entirely different.

We have already seen that even the parking companies understand that they cannot justify their own charges to their own puppet, wholly non-statutory, sham "alternative dispute resolution by way of arbitration" faux court.

However it serves the parking companies as it is simply a test of whether the motorist is likely to thrash the parking company in a proper court.

kirkbyinfurnesslad_2

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I have thought the same. How can they read and turn down an appeal from a little old lady about the very same scumbag PPC that they know full well has no consideration of GPEOL in their charges?

Someone on Friday was most indignant on the phone when I told them their appeal would fail. They told me they were going to do it anyway, didn't need me because they were right

I said good luck!!!

Nodding_Donkey

Isn't it the same in court though? Those that know how to write a decent defence (or who to get advice from) win and those that don't lose. I know that the faxing fairy can help in court by bringing things to the judges attention but there isn't a mechanism for that to happen at POPLA.

Guys_Dad

The basis of English law - or quasi-law - is that the judge/adjudicator considers the evidence in front of them as presented by both sides.

On balance, this seems correct to me taking the bigger picture beyond parking.

Frankly, a test case in the court of appeal, assuming the motorist won, would wipe out the current penalising charges at a stroke, but until then, let's get the word spread.

I do hope that the Parking Wars programme on BBC will extend to PPCs in a future episode or series.

halibut2209

Guys_Dad wrote: »

I do hope that the Parking Wars programme on BBC will extend to PPCs in a future episode or series.

If they do, it will doubtlessly be completely inaccurate

peter_the_piper

I am going to be difficult now but London Councils were given a set of parameters to work to and unfortunately mitigation was not one of them. I'm sure they would love to say to the driver that ""Ere you should use this defence" but I doubt they would be in a job for long if they did. PPC's would create a heck of a stink and the likes of crapita would probably find a legal way of clobbering them. Unfortunately them the rules and i doubt they would lose much sleep just because the driver gave an ineligible defence.

Aaron_Aadvark

peter_the_piper wrote: »

...London Councils were given a set of parameters to work to and un fortunately mitigation was not one of them...

Therein lies the problem. POPLA is following procedures set out by the BPA Ltd and cannot act independently.