We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

UKPPO Popla Appeal Help

12357

Comments

  • bazster
    bazster Posts: 7,436 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Jinx_001 wrote: »
    Is it 6 months from the date of the alleged offence? If so, as the invoice was issues in mid February, it is well over the 6 months! Does that mean that they cannot pursue me further?

    It means that you can't be prosecuted under the byelaws. And since Cheetham has stated that his fraudulent demand for money "was issued under these byelaws and not contract law" that's another reason why you can invite him to go screw himself.
    Je suis Charlie.
  • hoohoo
    hoohoo Posts: 1,717 Forumite
    bazster wrote: »
    It means that you can't be prosecuted under the byelaws. And since Cheetham has stated that his fraudulent demand for money "was issued under these byelaws and not contract law" that's another reason why you can invite him to go screw himself.

    Hats off to POPLA for holding onto the case for so long. Perhaps they knew what they were doing after all!
    Dedicated to driving up standards in parking
  • Thank you all for all your help and excellent info.


    I didn't know about the time period for prosecution under byelaws, so its good to know they can't do anything else now!


    But just to keep you all posted, I received a letter from UKPPO:


    "Dear Sir/Madam,

    As you are no aware POPLA have withdrawn your case on the instruction of the Lead Adjudicator as they do not process Penalty Charge Notices, see attached.

    Your case has been reviewed and we stand by our decision to reject the appeal you initially made to us. However, due the circumstances we are willing to accept the reduced charge of £60 if payment is made within the next 14-days.

    Please note that after this time you will lose the chance to pay the discounted rate and the full amount of £100 will become payable.

    If you choose to do nothing, we will seek to recover the monies owed to us via our debt recovery procedures and may proceed with Court action against you.

    Kind Regards"


    I've also noted that they have now added LTD to their letter head with their Deansgate address at the top and put their registered company number and address on the bottom :


    U.K Parking Patrol Office Ltd are registered in the UK (company registration number 07105527)
    Registered office address: 7 Christie Way, Christie Fields, Manchester M21 7QY (not for correspondence)


    Doesn't look like they're wanting to give up just yet!!
  • ManxRed
    ManxRed Posts: 3,530 Forumite
    No, they're getting sad and desperate now.

    I think they're beginning to twig that their options are fast disappearing and they're looking to try and extort what they can.

    Has a BPA complaint gone in yet?
    Je Suis Cecil.
  • It'll be going in today. I've added in UKPPO's recent correspondence to the list of complaints.


    Thanks for your help
  • ManxRed
    ManxRed Posts: 3,530 Forumite
    They're in clear breach of clause 22.2 of the CoP, specifically they are unable to offer any means of independent adjudication, POPLA will not handle these appeals.
    Je Suis Cecil.
  • bazster
    bazster Posts: 7,436 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Dear "UKPPO",

    Here are some matters of which you are evidently unaware:

    1. Where a breach of a byelaw is alleged charges must be laid before the magistrates within 6 months of the date of the offence (Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 127(1)); since in this case this period has long elapsed there is no prospect of a prosecution and your offer of an "alternative" is worthless.

    2. The publicly-accessible roads at Newcastle Airport are subject to various road traffic enactments, as are all publicly-accessible roads (Road Traffic Act 1988 192(1)). Pursuant to the Airports Act 1986 63(2)(d), and the Newcastle Airport byelaws section 6, the byelaws are not applicable to any road to which the road traffic enactments apply. I believe you may be committing an offence by attempting to deceive motorists into paying charges pursuant to the byelaws where the byelaws do not apply.

    3. I believe you may be committing a further offence by demanding money in lieu of prosecution, which could be construed as a demand for a bribe.

    4. Since it is now evident that PoPLA is not available for this "charge", you are in breach of the British Parking Association Code of Practice for issuing charges where there is no independent appeal available.

    5. UKPPO Ltd. is registered at companies house as "dormant". I believe that you may be committing further offences by purporting that this company is trading.

    In light of the above you will understand when I tell you that you will not be receiving a penny from me. Your actions have now been reported to Trading Standards, the BPA, the DVLA and Companies House.

    Yours etc.

    And make those complaints!!!
    Je suis Charlie.
  • I reckon my letter from UKPPO will also be waiting when I get home Jinx_001. Looks like I will be complaining to BPA also. Need to get a letter typed up tonight.
  • ManxRed
    ManxRed Posts: 3,530 Forumite
    Is it worth adding in that the bylaws do not appear to have been signed off by the Secretary of State?

    I guess, given the RTE that over-ride the bylaws, its a moot point anyway.
    Je Suis Cecil.
  • bazster
    bazster Posts: 7,436 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    ManxRed wrote: »
    Is it worth adding in that the bylaws do not appear to have been signed off by the Secretary of State?

    I guess, given the RTE that over-ride the bylaws, its a moot point anyway.

    Why not?

    Additional point:

    The airport byelaws appear to have been neither sealed by the airport operator, nor approved by the Secretary of State. If this is indeed the case then the byelaws are not effective.
    Je suis Charlie.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.8K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.3K Life & Family
  • 258.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.