blank popla email

morfio

Did anyone else get an email this morning from Popla with a blank pdf attached?

I assume its to do with the change over, and ongoing unresolved appeals...

-- NEVER MIND POPLA ARE RESENDING THE DOCUMENT--

ampersand

Keep this as part of your parking event file until you know your appeal is successful.
Heaven forfend, but it may be useful should follow-up be necessary.
Keep us informed, please - and good luck.

Edna_Basher

We received three separate e-mails from POPLA this morning regarding our three long-overdue appeals. However, the attached PDFs weren’t blank; they all read as follows:

“Dear .....

Before your appeal was determined, it was adjourned pending a decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of ParkingEye Limited v Beavis (B2/2014/2010).

As you will be aware, the decision of the Court of Appeal has now been handed down. A copy of the judgment is available on the POPLA website.

As previously stated would happen, the Lead Adjudicator has directed that the case will be adjourned for a further 21 days. The case will therefore not be listed before 21 days in order to allow both parties to make any representations in light of the Court of Appeal decision. It does remain the position that it is for the party seeking to rely on any authority from a case in the higher courts, to explain how they submit it relates to the appeal in question and in particular the matter to be determined.

Since a larger than usual number of appeals will therefore now fall to be considered on or after the same day, there may inevitably be some delay before your case is decided.

Yours sincerely

R Reeve
POPLA Administrative Team”

Despite what POPLA may have claimed in the letters, none of our appeals was in any way dependent upon the outcome of Beavis, all being based primarily on the respective operators’ non compliance with POFA 2012. It seems that the Lead Adjudicator has decided to adjourn our cases simply because there are no adjudicators left at “old POPLA” to consider these appeals.

POPLA’s closing statement that there may inevitably be some delay suggests that these appeals will be stuck in limbo for quite some time to come.

bod1467

What has the CoA decision got to do with this? Didn't they then extend the adjournment based on the case going to the Supreme Court? (Who have NOT yet handed down their decision).

Edna_Basher

Agreed - POPLA's excuses are all nonsense.

Hot_Bring

It does look like London Councils are simply bailing out and handing all cases to the new service and using this flimsy excuse.

Edna_Basher

Stop Press: we have just received another e-mail from POPLA advising us that unfortunately due to a system error you may have received an incorrect letter. Please find attached the letter that you should have received. We apologise for any confusion that this may have caused.

The replacement letter reads as follows:

“Dear Sir or Madam

As you may be aware, a case concerning parking on private land, ParkingEye Limited -v- Beavis, has now been heard by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. However, a decision is not expected for some time.

Where either party has requested an adjournment or where it appears to the Assessor that a POPLA appeal raises the same issue as in the above case, and there is no other ground upon which the appeal can be determined, the matter will be adjourned.

Accordingly, your appeal is adjourned to a provisional date for determination of Monday 9 November 2015.

In the meantime, no enforcement action can proceed once a case is registered at POPLA, before the POPLA appeal is determined. Further, there is absolutely no requirement to pay any sort of ‘administration charge’ to the operator, in order for the case to be taken out of the list.

You should be contacted again after the decision of the Supreme Court is handed down”.

In our case, the letter is still not correct because a) we did not request an adjournment and b) there is another ground upon which the appeal could have been determined (i.e. the operator’s clear failure to comply with POFA 2012).

soton_25

Edna, I am same as your regarding point b). You are not alone

hoohoo

Hot_Bring wrote: »

It does look like London Councils are simply bailing out and handing all cases to the new service and using this flimsy excuse.

Almost right, except the new service are declining to take on the 4,000 cases, it not being part of the tendered contract. The BPA will at some point need to find someone to adjudicate these for them. Ironically perhaps they are now hoping for Beavis to win, because then they can stamp them all 'appeal accepted' at low cost. Otherwise they will need to pay someone to actually adjudicate them.

danish57

My case is also very similar. Please see my latest submission contained in 'PCN Received' which has some feedback from BPA.

Northlakes

If the BPA owe POPLA a huge amount of money I can't see them being in any hurry to do any more work. Would you?