POPLA appeal won

ericonabike

Hi

Just found this part of the forum after the event, but thought I'd post results and ask a couple of questions.

My wife was 'fined' £100 by Civil Enforcement for overstaying at a shopping centre. She genuinely hadn't seen the signs [bit embarrassed when we visited later to check them out] and had parked five hours in a four hour 'limit'. After a bit of discussion she agreed that I could take it on - she was concerned re 'being taken to court' which is exactly the result CE were looking for I suspect.

Anyway, after a lot of research, I now know more about BPA, POPLA and PCNs than is perhaps good for me. I went through the 'reconsider' stage and then to POPLA on the 'not genuine pre-estimate of costs' ground, and the assessor found in my favour in a very clearly worded one page decision. Result! One comment - I realise these decisions do not set a precedent, but there seems to be a clear line taken by POPLA now, which should be forcing the parking companies to change their business model. Why has this received no publicity?

One further comment here: I found a lot of people slagging off POPLA on the grounds that it's not independent. I used to work in a similar organisation in the public sector and we attracted the same comments. As with POPLA - judge by results. Over 50% of appeals allowed!

One question - the PCN was issued to my wife by post, after contacting DVLA, more than three weeks after the 'offence'. My reading of the law is that in this situation the notice has to be issued within 14 days for it to be valid. I chose not to use this in the appeal as I wanted to see if the 'pre-assessment of loss' ground would stand up. But was my interpretation of the law correct?

trisontana

Did CEL submit any evidence to POPLA, or (as they have been doing) not bother and you won by default?

Umkomaas

I realise these decisions do not set a precedent, but there seems to be a clear line taken by POPLA now, which should be forcing the parking companies to change their business model. Why has this received no publicity?

Many are attempting to change their 'business model', by jumping ship from the BPA to the IPC, whose own version of POPLA - the IAS - is making motorists' appeals virtually impossible to win. Same old sc*m, whichever way.

http://www.theipc.info/#!aos-members/cv75

But was my interpretation of the law correct?

Yes, if it was an ANPR camera notice.

The_Deep

Popla is fine as long as you know the magic words, tell them that you slipped and broke your leg and you will lose.

A large minority of the general public think that these invoices are fines, when threatened with court they think wigs and magistrates, they therefore pay up, which is why PPCs are happy to lose a few Popla appeals. They are unlikely to change their business model as long as people pay up.

Dave_TH

trisontana wrote: »

Did Parking Eye submit any evidence to POPLA, or (as they have been doing) not bother and you won by default?

Not PE was CEL

trisontana

Sorry, my mistake! (now corrected).

ericonabike

Thanks all. Yes they did submit a defence, around 8 pages, that I am guessing is their standard reply. Ironically, my wife's friend, who she went shopping with, stayed even longer and has heard nothing at all from CE!

Has martin lewis done an expose of these practices recently? Seems the firm's have changed from clamping using bouncers to extracting money with menaces...

Coupon-mad

There is more than one TV programme planned for the New Year, we know this as journalists have contacted us and some regulars here occasionally feature (not me). And there's a Court of Appeal case (against ParkingEye) taking place in the Spring which might well get more publicity in March 2015, PE v Beavis.

As for your reading of the law - answer = 'it's not quite that simple'. This is covered in the NEWBIES sticky thread where I do already point out that PPCs don't have to avail themselves of the POFA (with the 14 days rule for keeper liability) and I mention specifically in the NEWBIES sticky, that CEL is one such PPC which does not use the POFA (nor do Smart Parking at Asda, and nor do VCS any more, it seems). They use a postal PCN without the prescribed wording from Schedule 4, so they cannot get 'keeper liability' but it doesn't render their fake PCN unlawful as such.