POPLA - Beavis delay

carp_ark

Hi there

I would be interested in opinions/thoughts on the following:

- "invoice" issued for non-payment at station car park; full payment was actually made, but after a short delay after actually parking
- appealed many weeks ago to POPLA, based on usual arguments - GPEOL, bad signage, railyway land not relevant land etc.
- Following Beavis, appeal has been adjourned for a further 21 days for either party to make represenations.

Questions:

1) should I wait to see if PPC cites Beavis (they didn't in their original evidence pack), before setting out why my case can be distinguished from it? Or just go ahead and provide my comments anyway.

2) although I think the other points in the appeal are strong points (esp. bad signage, not "relevant land"), in anticipation that I may potentially lose the appeal based on Beavis, I have been considering a complaint to DVLA/BPA for misuse of PofA. Relooking at the original ticket, it states "[the PPC] has the right to pursue the registered keeper of the vehicel for the unpaid parking charges". On the NTK, it states "the vehicle keeper data has been obtained from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (under Regulation 27(1)(e) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002). Finally, below the usual guff, the car park sign itself states "Breach of the car park Terms and Conditions may also constitute a breach of the Railway Byelaws, which may result in criminal proceedings".

The question is - given the above, has the PPC extracted the driver details from the DVLA inappropriately, such that it merits a complaint to the DVLA (and could this lead to the ticket being cancelled)? Presumbly the various references to "railway byelaws" are sufficient to establish that the land is indeed railway land? And the fact that the PPC obtained details from DVLA shows that they are not pursuing the ticket under Byelaws...

3) or shall i just wait and see what the outcome of POPLA is?

Thanks in advance for any advice!

The_Deep

I cannot answer your question, but I am puzzled why PoPLA are not delaying hearings until the Supreme Court rules on Beavis. After all, they delayed hearings until after the COA decision. Alternatively, they could just rule on Locus/signs/contract/vat/or relevant land/POFA compliance. There are many ways to skin a cat.

bargepole

The_Deep wrote: »

I cannot answer your question, but I am puzzled why PoPLA are not delaying hearings until the Supreme Court rules on Beavis...

At the moment, it's just permission granted, and Mr Beavis has 42 days from Judgment to file a Notice of Appeal.


Until that's filed, and the appeal is officially in the system, I doubt whether POPLA will stay cases.

Captain_Krunch

I recall over on Pepipoo pre CoA days that a popla appeal was won on the keeper liability point. As GPEOL was always the winner these other winning points were ignored by the popla assessors and chucked in as icing on the cake by appellants. I would reiterate to popla that the ppc have failed to establish keeper liability. Its up to the ppcs to prove you were driving.
Would a complaint to the dvla get the ticket cancelled.No!!