POPLA Appeal Refused - advice please

g0wfv

Personally (but I'm not an experienced poster to this forum) my gut says go with hoohoo's point of POFA 2012 Keeper Liabilty not applying as this was a moving traffic violation and not a parking violation which the POFA 2012 Sch 4 deals with, and the driver's identity has not been established by anybody (obviously you're not going to tell, as there is no legal requirement for you to!) - One question, does the PCN mention POFA 2012 and if so, what's the wording? I don't think I've seen it mentioned in the thread

Also what ManxRed says about inadequate signage needs to be mentioned. How can it form a contract if you are (Edit: someone is) driving and don't have time to read it in detail. Definitely have a look at Parking Prankster's website for some good gen!

Then add some other generic paragraphs about punitive charges, unfair terms etc. You could also go for a paragraph intimating that you believe the PPC to not have the correct contract/authority from the landowner to issue charges and/or pursue through the courts (there has to be a specifically worded contract for it to be valid) and finally a para about GPEOL (don't forget to include the Beavis caveat)

If you need something to work from, feel free to use my appeal as a basis (I also used someone else's and tailored to suit). My thread can be found at https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5307735

Obviously appeal point 1 doesn't apply to you; that is of course my main appeal point, but replace it with your own main point(s) and renumber accordingly.

Hope it works out for you.

DollyDee_2

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5192091

Post #41

Could you use Starsaver's successful appeal decision to support your "case"?

hoohoo

Dear POPLA,

I wish to add the following points to my appeal

1) There is no keeper liability
2) No contract was entered into
3) The charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
4) There was no landowner authority to issue charges

1) There is no keeper liability
The ticket was issued because the vehicle drove in a bus lane. The vehicle was never parked, or even stopped, at any time. The Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012, sch 4 is specifically concerned with PARKING on private land. By definition, a moving vehicle cannot be parked. The Act does not therefore apply and there is no keeper liability. As keeper, I am not liable. Only the driver is liable.

2) No contract was entered into
Additionally, no contract can be entered into. It is impossible for the signage to form a contract with a person in a moving vehicle because for offer and acceptance to take place the consumer must have time to read and understand the entire contract. This cannot have happened in this case as the sign contains too many words and the font is too small.

[if you want more help with wording on this bit, post up the information from their POPLA pack to do with signage. It might help if you post up the notice to keeper too. If you want to keep this off forum, email to hoohooparking@gmail.com]

3) The charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss
If a contract was in place, the charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore is a penalty.

If a contract was not in place then if it is ruled a trespass has occurred, this is a tort, and the charge must equal the actual loss to the landowner,which is it is argues, is nil.

4) There was no landowner authority to issue charges
The landowner must give authority to issue charges and collect monies. There is no proof this is the case.