Help Help UKPS

walabala

My appeal has been accepted just received email from POPLA.

Thank you very much for everyone who helped me in this process.

Umkomaas

walabala wrote: »

My appeal has been accepted just received email from POPLA.

Thank you very much for everyone who helped me in this process.

Well done, but please tell us on what grounds and who the Assessor was.

Can you post a transcript here and in the POPLA Decisions sticky - this will help others facing your (now resolved) predicament?

walabala

Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

The operator issued a parking charge notice to the appellant for breaching the terms and conditions of the site.

The appellant has made various representations; I have not dealt with them all as I am allowing this appeal on the following ground.

The appellant has not admitted to being the driver of the vehicle on the date of the alleged breach.

Liability for parking charges lies primarily with the driver; however, the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 provides that, in certain circumstances, the registered keeper of a vehicle may be held liable for parking charges incurred by the driver of the vehicle.

In order for the operator to be able to recover unpaid charges from the registered keeper, four conditions must be met:

1) The first condition is that the operator has the right to enforce against the driver of the vehicle the requirement to pay the unpaid charges, and the operator does not know the name and address of the driver.

In this case, it appears the driver of the vehicle parked the vehicle and then walked off site, and that the operator does not know the name and address of the driver. Accordingly, I find that the first condition is met.

2) The second condition is that: either a notice to driver in accordance with paragraph 7 of the schedule, followed by a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 8 is given; or, a notice to keeper in accordance with paragraph 9 is given.

The operator has not provided any evidence of a notice to keeper being issued.

As keeper liability is statutory, it is for the operator to produce evidence that all of the requirements laid out in the Act have ben met. Accordingly, copies of all Notices relied on must be produced.

In this case, the operator has failed to produce evidence of the notice to keeper relied on, and so I am unable to find that the requirements laid out in paragraph 8 of the Schedule have been met. Consequently, I must find that





the operator has failed to show that the appellant is liable as the keeper of the vehicle.

The operator has not produced any evidence to demonstrate that the appellant was the driver of the vehicle and also has not produced any evidence to show that the appellant is liable for the parking charge as either the driver or registered keeper.

Accordingly, I must allow the appeal.

Amber Ahmed
Assessor