MET Parking at McDonalds

Big_Ells

Thank you all. I have sent my response just in time for the 7 day window.

Big_Ells

So this morning I got an email letter from Wright Hassall LLP with the following:

Appeal Outcome Rejected

We have been appointed by the British Parking Association (“BPA”) to act as an independent appeals body, under the brand of Parking on Private Land Appeals (“POPLA”), in respect of the Appeal and to consider
both the Appellants and the Car Park Operator’s positions before providing a decision to the parties. We are
not instructed to act on behalf of either party.
We confirm that we have considered the appeal, taking into account all of the evidence at hand and applying the prevailing legislation and with reference to the BPA Code of Practice, and have decided to reject the Appeal on this occasion. To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to the Car Park Operator in the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) will not be cancelled.

Reasons for dismissing the Appeal

• The Appellant stated in the Appeal that the amount of the parking charge is unreasonable. Pursuant to the guidance set out in the Supreme Court’s decision in ParkingEye v Beavis and in accordance with the BPA Code of Practice, a reasonable charge would be £100.00. As the charge the Car Park Operator has imposed is equal to or less than £100.00, we have no option but to reject the Appeal.

• The Appellant has stated in the Appeal that the signage at the car park is not adequate and that they were unaware that they had entered into a contract by remaining at the location. Upon reviewing the evidence provided by both parties we contend that the signage is adequate and does comply with the BPA Code of Practice. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.

• The Appellant has requested evidence that the Car Park Operator has a legal right to manage the site. We are in receipt of sufficient evidence from the Car Park Operator to satisfy us that the Car Park Operator does have a legal right to manage parking at this location and to issue Parking Charge Notices. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.

To the Appellant

To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to the Car Park Operator in the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice will not be cancelled.

To the Car Park Operator

As the Appeal has been rejected, you must allow the Appellant 28 days to make payment. If payment is not forthcoming, you may take further action to recover the PCN.

This is the final decision in this Appeal. We are not able to respond to any future correspondence from either party, nor are we able to provide any information to either party over the telephone.

What are my options from here? They haven't taken all the points of the appeal into consideration.

nigelbb

Another incorrect verdict from WHOPLA. They gave completely ignored the fact that the OP is not liable because the PPC did not comply with POFA by providing a valid Notice to Hirer with relevant documents. You need to register a complaint with WHOPLA POPLA ISPA & SRA as Wright Hassell have not considers all the evidence & arrived at the wrong decision either through bias or incompetence.

Big_Ells

nigelbb wrote: »

Another incorrect verdict from WHOPLA. They gave completely ignored the fact that the OP is not liable because the PPC did not comply with POFA by providing a valid Notice to Hirer with relevant documents. You need to register a complaint with WHOPLA POPLA ISPA & SRA as Wright Hassell have not considers all the evidence & arrived at the wrong decision either through bias or incompetence.

Do you have a link to where I need to complain or an email address? Thanks

nigelbb

How about doing some research yourself instead of waiting to be spoon fed? A few minutes of Googling will find the answers you want.

Castle

nigelbb wrote: »

Another incorrect verdict from WHOPLA. They gave completely ignored the fact that the OP is not liable because the PPC did not comply with POFA by providing a valid Notice to Hirer with relevant documents. You need to register a complaint with WHOPLA POPLA ISPA & SRA as Wright Hassell have not considers all the evidence & arrived at the wrong decision either through bias or incompetence.

You can't complain to ISPA as they don't investigate WHOPLA cases
http://ispa.co.uk/news/article/23/ispastatementregardingpoplacomplaintsbeingadministeredbywrighthassall

nigelbb

It's still important to get ISPA to log & acknowledge complaints re WHOPLA. BTW I left the BPA Ltd off the list of bodies to complain to.

Big_Ells

nigelbb wrote: »

How about doing some research yourself instead of waiting to be spoon fed? A few minutes of Googling will find the answers you want.

Wow someone got out the wrong side of bed. Asking for a link you may already have is hardly being spoon fed. All you had to say is no i don't but you can google it.
Sorry for thinking we were mature adults here.

beamerguy

The ISPA have clearly stated ....

"ISPA is unable at present to look into complaints regarding Wright Hassall's administration of PoPLA.
ISPA does not have a direct arrangement with Wright Hassall. The appeals process is under a contract between Wright Hassall and the BPA, so ISPA does not have the powers to ensure it can carry out investigations and audits of cases dealt with by PoPLA operators. "

Hence rendering the ISPA useless courtesy of the BPA

The SRA (Solicitors Regulation Authority), appear to still be operating

Mr Paul Philip Chief Executive SRA
Email paul.philip@sra.org.uk

BPA
aos@britishparking.co.uk
and .... COPY IN THE dvla
david.dunford@dvla.gsi.gov.uk

The_Deep

Hang on Big fellow, that is a bit unfair, you have no idea how many numnuts we have to deal with here.


Besides you asked for four links not one.