Auditors conclude that PoPLA is being operated unlawfully

bazster

http://notomob.co.uk/discussions/index.php/topic,4458.0.html

The NoToMob strikes again.

PWC believes that London Councils does not have delegated powers from its members (the London councils!) to operate PoPLA, and has instructed LC to include as a liability in its accounts all income received for operating PoPLA.

LC disagrees, but has included the liability anyway. LC is trying to regularise the situation by expressly requesting delegation from its members. Pranky has previously blogged about this and suggested that it may not be possible for such delegation to be retrospective.

PWC has also identified that BPA Ltd. is a "related party" to LC due to a common director (hi Nick!), and "the related party transaction disclosure" has been revised to include all transactions with BPA Ltd.

PWC also believes that LC's Audit Committee should be made aware of the related party relationship between LC and BPA Ltd.


Seems to me that if LC's auditors are satisfied that LC and BPA Ltd. are "related parties" then the DfT should be investigating whether PoPLA can be truly considered independent.

I can only imagine that Nick Lester's position at London Councils is hanging by a thread.

bazster

Mr. Mustard, a well-known blogger about affairs in Barnet, is asking his council NOT to delegate powers to London Councils for LC to get mixed up in things (i.e. PoPLA) which have nothing to do with Barnet.

http://lbbspending.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/no-messing-with-notomob.html

I would urge any other London resident reading this to similarly complain to their councillors and tell them that there is no reason for their council to be involved in running a national scheme of no particular benefit or relevance to any London local authority.

If PoPLA collapses so does keeper liability, and if the government is obliged to suspend PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 it may never get re-instated.

Guys_Dad

bazster wrote: »

Mr. Mustard, a well-known blogger about affairs in Barnet, is asking his council NOT to delegate powers to London Councils for LC to get mixed up in things (i.e. PoPLA) which have nothing to do with Barnet.

http://lbbspending.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/no-messing-with-notomob.html

I would urge any other London resident reading this to similarly complain to their councillors and tell them that there is no reason for their council to be involved in running a national scheme of no particular benefit or relevance to any London local authority.

If PoPLA collapses so does keeper liability, and if the government is obliged to suspend PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 it may never get re-instated.

Would that not only apply to BPA members?I appreciate they are only less than 10% but I could see PE jumping ship. But surely there being a stay of execution to prevent chaos whilst a replacement for POPLA was sought, possibly by the BPA creating its own "independent" appeals service.

bazster

I can't see the government being able to sustain keeper liability if there were no "independent" appeals process for 99% of fake fines issued. It was so definite that PoPLA was the quid pro quo for keeper liability that the scope for legal challenge to PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 would be enormous - and the Schedule itself reserves the power for the government to suspend or abolish it.

I'd love to see the IPC try to absorb ParkingEye. There just aren't enough unemployed lawyers in the country for that number of appeals, the system would collapse overnight.

Umkomaas

I'd love to see the IPC try to absorb ParkingEye. There just aren't enough unemployed lawyers in the country for that number of appeals, the system would collapse overnight.

There'd be a couple of dozen from POPLA, but whether they'd fancy a relocation to a stable in the Red Cow Yard is another matter!

Guys_Dad

bazster wrote: »

I'd love to see the IPC try to absorb ParkingEye. There just aren't enough unemployed lawyers in the country for that number of appeals, the system would collapse overnight.

What about the about-to-be-unemployed POPLA lawyers?? And given that IPC don't spend as much time on their adjudication reports, or procedures with motorists seeing PPC papers, that isn't really a barrier is it?

bazster

Guys_Dad wrote: »

What about the about-to-be-unemployed POPLA lawyers??

They might have a qualification in law but most of them aren't lawyers. The IPC claims that its assessors are all lawyers. Not sure I believe them, but that's what they claim.

The_Deep

I suspect that most of the Adjudicators are in fact newly graduated LLbs who are seeking training contracts.

I understand that such contracts are notoriously difficult to obtain. One of my tenants was a solicitor and she told be that she made 2,000 applications before she was successful.

HO87

One has to wonder to what degree LC are ignorant of their Director of Corporate Services other interests?

He is and has been a member of the BPA Council since 1994 for goodness sake. Prior to coming to LC he was London Parking Director from 1991 to 1998 and then moved to the forerunner of TfL and continued when TfL took over (in 2000) - becoming Patrick Troy's boss (PT was then Head of Enforcement at TfL*) briefly. He has been at LC since 2001 and so one would imagine that the subject would have arisen periodically.

Aside from his work at the BPA he has been president of the European Parking Association since 2009. On EPA documents Nick is described as an "international expert". Surely LC are aware of his interests?

* - By the by, it was PT who implemented the now widely discredited bus lane and moving traffic offence enforcement (by CCTV) programme during his reign at TfL.

hoohoo

Nick Lester has recently resigned from the BPA by the way

HO87

hoohoo wrote: »

Nick Lester has recently resigned from the BPA by the way

Together with the entire council. One wonders why?
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR YVETTE WIDDOWFIELD[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR ALAN WOOD[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR DAVID PEACH[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR KAREN NAYLOR[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR PAUL KYTE[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR AUSTEN HUNTER[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR GRAHAM MORPHEW[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR RICHARD HEIN[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR ALASTAIR COOPER[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR GRAHAM BROWN[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR PETER LOWE[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR MICHAEL BRADY[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR NICHOLAS LESTER[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR ASHLEY BIJSTER[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]03/07/2014[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]TM01 [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]APPOINTMENT TERMINATED, DIRECTOR KEITH BANBURY[/FONT]