Parking Prankster posts on POPLA Service Provision

bazster

Guys_Dad wrote: »

However, back to the point, London councils are only likely to throw a wobbly if it is costing them.

Not necessarily. As a public body London Councils has to follow strict rules about what powers it can and cannot exercise. In extremis people in public office can go to jail if they abuse their powers.

LM9

Stroma wrote: »

For me it's a waste of time at the moment and it will probably be better if just told people to ignore the whole scam, but that would only work if everyone ignored them unless a claim was issued. The whole scam would collapse around them.

But you also say:

Popla does not work , it's an utter waste of time, the fact is this appeal service is unfair unless you are versed in legal jargon and have an internet connection and know about mse or pepipoo , if you don't then it's likely you'll lose.

Which seems a little unfair - POPLA does work for those that do some research and are aware of the process, which is:
1. Go to MSE
2. Read the stickys
3. Craft an appeal and ask for someone to verify it
4. er..
5 that's it

So surely it would be as easy to tell people to go to MSE than to tell the same people to ignore it? In fact it is much better to point people here as then they will win at POPLA.

If everyone ignores their scam PCNs then, sure, not everyone will get taken to court, but the parking companies don't need to take everyone to court, just enough to turn a tidy profit, and as they make more profit and win more cases it will be picked up by the press and the story won't be "ignore a ticket and you have less chance of going to court than getting hit by a bus on the way to court" it will instead be "if you don't pay a PCN you will get CCJs and lose your house and your job and your wife and your children and end up living in a cardboard box under a bridge".

I look at the numbers of people posting up their POPLA victory stories every day and it seems to me that POPLA is anything but a waste of time.

Umkomaas

In the grand scheme of things fewer than 2% of all tickets issued are appealed to POPLA. For those individuals who win (just a tad more than half of the ~2%) then POPLA works and is valuable and effective for them.

At a strategic level, at which I believe Stroma is working in the context of his remarks, if everyone ignored their PPC-issued PCNs then the house of cards would very swiftly become flat. This would be the quickest and cleanest way of sorting all this out.

On the same side of this coin, and again at a strategic level, if everyone who received a PPC-issued PCN had the help of this forum to write an appeal to POPLA, then again the house of cards would be flattened. A much more convoluted and (impossibly) resource heavy process.

But we all know that neither will happen, so we need to work with, but in parallel try to change, the status quo, and it's on the strategic horizon the focus needs to concentrate, whilst at the same time helping those in need at the operational/practical level.

And, from my experience, all regulars on here work at both these levels.

Stroma

Do you think I'm blind and blinkered? I post on this forum most days, I have advised people to appeal to popla thousands of times. But it still does not make popla fair or fit for use! How do you think people fair who don't know this site or how to appeal to popla without mitigation?

Popla is fundamentally flawed and doesn't work for a vast majority of people, that's why only about 1% of people appeal there! Most lose as they don't know mitigation doesn't work, the reason why is because nobody tells them!

Also an appeals service not advertised, no information given on how to use it, giving lessons to parking companies on how to win there, supposedly independent but owned by the bpa, and one of the top men nick lester is a member of the bpa .

I look at the numbers of people winning at popla everyday as people who've had to appeal to rid themselves of something unlawful! So having to waste time ridding themselves of vermin, they will never be compensated for their time.

Finally every appeal won means that every ticket issued for example gpeol in a car park means that every ticket issued for the same thing in that car park is unfair,, unfair means unlawful, so should be reported to the dvla for this parking company having no reasn to get your details so therefore breaking their kadoe contract.

HO87

I'm certain that the majority of those who receive PPC PCN's and do not appeal do not do so for one of the following reasons:

a. They think the PCN's have some form of statutory/authority.
b. They suspect that PCN's are "dodgy" in some way but are scared of the potential damage ignoring them or losing an appeal might do to their credit score.
c. They simply can't be bothered because TOWIE or whatever is on tonight
d. They simply can't bothered because its too difficult/they haven't got the time/they are scared.

I seriously doubt that POPLA's efficiency/efficacy as an appeals body or fitness for purpose ever enters the equation but that is not to say that it shouldn't.

And nor do I consider POPLA to be the best thing since sliced bread, it most certainly is not. At the time it was established it was only ever going to be a convenient political figleaf in the same way that Schedule 4 is. It was an easy method of temporarily shutting up a shrill lobby and little more.

Herzlos

POPLA won't be fit for use unless they take mitigation into account. Currently the only way to win it is with researched legalese rather than something you'd expect a layman to appeal with.

The only reason those legalese appeals are accepted is because there isn't any latitude to deny them, unless mitigation. I bet they'd still deny an appeal where the appelant claimed that they overstayed because the car was on fire, and provided photos of said burning car and a fire engine.

A lot of people will just pay the PCN because they believe the outright lies in the paperwork about CCJ's and credit ratings and court action, and decide it's not worth the risk even though they know it's a fraudulent invoice. In the long term that'll just hurt the people hiring the PPC's though as customers avoid them, and as more and more people successfully appeal, the news will spread that they can be beaten.

They are already largely ignored in Scotland because so many people know they are unenforceable.

Hot_Bring

HO87 wrote: »

I'm certain that the majority of those who receive PPC PCN's and do not appeal do not do so for one of the following reasons:

a. They think the PCN's have some form of statutory/authority.
b. They suspect that PCN's are "dodgy" in some way but are scared of the potential damage ignoring them or losing an appeal might do to their credit score.
c. They simply can't be bothered because TOWIE or whatever is on tonight
d. They simply can't bothered because its too difficult/they haven't got the time/they are scared.

I'll add point E to that list if I may. Coupon Mad and myself belong to a very popular forum for a certain football team. Fairly regularly threads come up about these private tickets and you'll be amazed at the number of people that, despite knowing about POPLA, claim they would rather pay it as they feel it's a moral obligation as "they broke the rules".

The_Deep

One of the problems is POPLAs refusal to take into account mitigating circumstances regardless of what they may be

True, but to make such judgements one needs maturity. IIMU that most Popla Adjudicators are newly graduated LLbs looking for training contracts. My daughter studied law and I met many of her fellow students. Many would not be ready to make such judgements. Therefore, it would be necessary to recruit more mature/experienced adjudicators, at greater cost.

Guys_Dad

The_Deep wrote: »

One of the problems is POPLAs refusal to take into account mitigating circumstances regardless of what they may be

True, but to make such judgements one needs maturity. IIMU that most Popla Adjudicators are newly graduated LLbs looking for training contracts. My daughter studied law and I met many of her fellow students. Many would not be ready to make such judgements. Therefore, it would be necessary to recruit more mature/experienced adjudicators, at greater cost.

As long as their name isn't Maloney.

nigelbb

The_Deep wrote: »

One of the problems is POPLAs refusal to take into account mitigating circumstances regardless of what they may be

True, but to make such judgements one needs maturity. IIMU that most Popla Adjudicators are newly graduated LLbs looking for training contracts. My daughter studied law and I met many of her fellow students. Many would not be ready to make such judgements. Therefore, it would be necessary to recruit more mature/experienced adjudicators, at greater cost.

It's correct & proper that POPLA as an allegedly independent appeals service does not consider mitigation. All POPLA can decide is on the facts as presented they cannot tell a PPC how to run their business. Mitigation can only be taken into account at the time of the first appeal to the PPC. It's up to the PPC to accept mitigation it's not up to POPLA to decide what are acceptable mitigating factors.