Dandarra Lettings Manchester

Umkomaas

And "you cannot knock it on the head" with a Popla appeal, you might win this one, cost them a bit, but they are often not very bright, and keep will probably keep up the ticketing.

You would knock the particular ticket on the head, done and dusted. Agreed it wouldn't necessarily prevent the PPC ticketing the individual again. And taking the 'knocking on the head' analogy one step further, I know that PPCs even if hit over the head with a lump hammer hardly blink, but a few losses at POPLA from the same motorist would soon see them pulling their crayon out to write that particular VRM on to their own white list.

Umkomaas

bazster wrote: »

Sometimes you have to stop being a wimp when people are out of order and just tell them to **** off. If someone walked up your driveway and put a fake parking ticket on your car would you appeal it? (Actually some people here probably would).

I agree, but most people who come on here for advice aren't 'the eff off and swivel' brigade.

I wouldn't be telling anyone ticketing my car on my drive to eff off, but they would leave with a limp for life and the guarantee of a Blue Badge.

Coupon-mad

wolleyowl wrote: »

Coupon-Mad / Umkomaas
Thanks for your reply
Cleaned everything up but struggling a little on section POFA section 8
I have been through the formal demand and they do not 1-identify who creditor is other than payment to care parking
2-No offer of discount for prompt payment only failure to provide owner/driver details or payment (£100.00) in full in 28 days £100.00. Failure to do so will see fine increase to £150.00plus further admin costs.
Should I just changes 3 in popla appeal letter from 9 (2) (h) to 8 (2) (g)
Fyi Formal demand notice to RK read as followsPlease be advised that a PCN was issue to vehicle X at X time on X date at location X for alleged contravention of invalid permit This PCN as not been paid and opportunity to pay a discount as been lost
Failure to provide owner/driver details or payment of full amount of £100.00 within 28 days of this notice will result in an increase to £150.00 plus further administrative costs. This letter will form part of our case against the driver of the vehicle
As the PCN issued to the above vehicle remained unpaid for 28 days we had reasonable cause to obtain the RK details from the DVLA to issue notice
Then goes on to give payment method / appeal procedure and section on declaration of owner/driver

Yes if 8(2)(g) is the part which talks about 'identify the creditor' which I don't know off the top of my head but just needs you to check for sure that's the right part. Then just add a summary as you've just posted it here to show why you think the NTK isn't compliant. You'll win on 'no GPEOL' anyway!

As long as you've removed 'VCS' throughout and changed the top like Umkomaas said earlier so it's about your case not someone else's charge, then it can go to POPLA. Tick 3 out of 4 appeal boxes on the POPLA website (it's obvious which not to tick).

wolleyowl

Guys thanks for contrasting view points but personally feel I am going about it in the right way to save endless court threatening papers (been there before and its a pain)
Apologise for not getting things right first time and subsequently wasting peoples time on here to put me right however now I have cleared up draft appeal as advised I could still do with a response to post #17
Thanks

wolleyowl

Ignore post #25

wolleyowl

Coupon Mad
Its 8 (2) (h) not not (g) as initially posted (big fingers)
"identify the creditor and specify how and to whom payment or notification to the creditor may be made"

Coupon-mad

Yep that's the one to quote then. I wouldn't waste too much time on that point now you know you are citing the right paragraph. The case will win on no GPEOL anyway!

wolleyowl

Another success on GPEOL
Assessor Ricky Powell

He stated
Where such a submission is made there is a burden on the operator and not the driver to provide a GPEOL which details how they calculated the parking charge amount. It does not need to be particularly detailed or amount to exactly the charge amount because it is simply on estimate. However one must be provided.
The operator as not established the charge reflects a GPEOL. Its estimate amounts to a maximum £61.44 whereas the parking charge is for £100.00. Therefore the parking charge is clearly a penalty and is unenforceable. The appellant is not liable to pay it.

Thanks to all for help and advice in winning my appeal

Coupon-mad

Gawd Care Parking are stupid! Well done. Have you added the decision to 'POPLA Decisions' at the top of the forum?