Apcoa parking charge notice - birmingham airport

Redx

its 2 members, not one (a thread hijack)

one is contradicting the paperwork of the other

enfield_freddy

Redx wrote: »

if its not applicable, then why do they keep issuing popla codes and losing at popla ?

your theory is great, but not borne out in practice

its the same at Luton too, good theory, but apcoa dont apply your excellent theory and issue popla codes, then lose at popla

yes and the BPA should be stamping out on the issue of tickets on non relevant land , but they won,t


most of the airport mob have moved to the IPC , which would not know a N07 bus from a jumbo jet


practice needs putting in place , forget it with the IPC , but with the BPA a full complaint should be made to them and the DVLA that the company involved are breaking rules.

enfield_freddy

Redx wrote: »

its 2 members, not one (a thread hijack)

one is contradicting the paperwork of the other

true , as you have posted many times , starting a new thread reduces confusion

Redx

I agree, but all the theory in the world doesnt change the fact that Birmingham airport and apcoa (and Luton and apcoa) have always been treated as non-relevant land and appeal to apcoa and then popla

unless it changes, my advice will be the same , appeal, then take it to popla

the fact apcoa sent it shows its a pcn and therefore its popla if refused by apcoa

2.5 years I have been advising this, because the proof of the pudding is in the eating, not the list of ingredients or the recipe

my advice in the next thread about it will remaing the same, until they start the bylaws route

same applies to the manchester tram metrolink too

not relevant land as its railway, yet its always a popla appeal (which wins)

enfield_freddy

theory's are different to the laws of the land,


abide by the laws set by the government , and challenge any PPC that makes there's up


there is always a "good" chance that POPLa misread this as being applicable land , why bother , let the PPC try it in court and weep


why are we !!!!ing about , the land is either relevant or not , not the words of a scumbag firm that are ripping people off


relevant = POPLa


non relevant , = !!!! off and chase the driver


one of the stipulations of the BPA is that they only act on relevant land , hell its sanction points if they break that rule ,


how many times have they tried to claim POFA rules and lost at POPLa , how many sanction points haver they been given for doing this knowingly?

Redx

if anyone wishes to try that approach I have no issue with it

but I try to advise an OP to the best of my ability to "beat" the ticket they received, not expect them to go "on a mission" to try to change the laws like Beavis has done, but feel free to do so if you want to try it

as for the different ways this has happened, look at this recent one where your scenario suddenly existed (except it was still a PPC, UKPPO) but didnt before when popla was being used

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5308502

it made me wonder if the BPA were cracking down ?

this one was popla and Care Parking (they run the parking contract for Metrolink on railway car parks here)

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5258953

its not relevant land, yet they still issue a pcn and popla codes

Redx

if APCOA reply to either of these 2 appeals with similar words, we know its bylaws

if they issue popla codes, we know its not bylaws

until the replies come back, we have no idea (but I believe it will be popla codes and not bylaws) - as its always been up to now for Apcoa and Care

yes APCOA are confused, as are Care Parking , Parking Eye and many other ppc,s

but they never let the law stand in their way of making a fast buck from ignorance

I suspect that UKPPO were prevented from the popla angle so tried a different tack, ie:- your tack

enfield_freddy

but that was an admission that this was a bylaw offence , and asking for a £100 bribe to see off the £10 trespass charge?

NellyK

I can see both points of view and agree it is muddy waters. As I have received a PCN as registered keeper I think I have no choice but to respond stating that POFA does not apply therefore I have no obligation to name the driver or pay the charge. Even if it did apply, the PCN was received 19 days after the alleged event so I think it would be void - is that right: Also, as the charge relates to an alleged contravention of use of the airport road I will state that a parking charge is not applicable as it is not clear that the car was indeed parked and anyway, the charge is unfair and cannot be justified. I will request that the charge be cancelled or a POPLA number issued. I have looked at the Newbies thread and these seem to be the most relevant points to my situation.

Redx

yep, but none of this debate in somebody elses thread is helping that OP until they appeal and get a reply back

we could debate it for 10 pages and still its theory until the OP and the hijacker have their replies