Free the 4000

Umkomaas

Any cases with spelling or grammar mistakes will be heard by Bargepole.

Poor guy, he'll be deluged! :rotfl:

The_Deep

Umkomaas wrote: »

Poor guy, he'll be deluged! :rotfl:

This is really not a laughing matter, the standard of English on here is, to say the least, poor. What is so difficult about using "their" and "there" correctly, differentiating between " your" and you're, and learning the proper use of the apostrophe?


It is almost as if these things are no longer considered important.

The_Deep

I think MP’s should ...


How on earth did I miss it before? That all time classic, the greengrocer's apostrophe, says it all really.

enfield_freddy

says even more that you can spend your time just looking for faults , instead of assisting people


my Grandad was a green grocer , so lay off!

HO87

In fairness Freddy has only quoted things verbatim. That he might have identified and corrected the inappropriate apostrophe is I think a bridge too far.

It was some years ago that I corrected a teacher's letter, brought home by HO87 Mk III, and sent it back to be rewritten. It was atrocious, lacked any structure and suggested that whilst the author may not have been entirely illiterate their reliance on a US-based spellcheck suggested that they were blind to the difference between color and colour. As I pointed out in the note attached to it the letter allowed you to draw three differing conclusions as to its intent. None were obviously the correct one.

It seems that we have a generation, and another one coming through the system now, for whom language need only be an approximation and if you are incapable of divining the meaning then that is your problem. It seems that even vague allusions are quite acceptable when precision is immediately available given proper construction, punctuation and a vocabulary commensurate with one's age.

The scales only fell from the eyes of HO87 Mk III when 6 months into his undergraduate course he discovered the richness of our language and found himself borrowing my much dog-eared 1966 copy of "The Queen's English".

ManxRed

HO87 wrote: »

In fairness Freddy has only quoted things verbatim. That he might have identified and corrected the inappropriate apostrophe is I think a bridge too far.

It was some years ago that I corrected a teacher's letter, brought home by HO87 Mk III, and sent it back to be rewritten. It was atrocious, lacked any structure and suggested that whilst the author may not have been entirely illiterate their reliance on a US-based spellcheck suggested that they were blind to the difference between color and colour. As I pointed out in the note attached to it the letter allowed you to draw three differing conclusions as to its intent. None were obviously the correct one.

It seems that we have a generation, and another one coming through the system now, for whom language need only be an approximation and if you are incapable of divining the meaning then that is your problem. It seems that even vague allusions are quite acceptable when precision is immediately available given proper construction, punctuation and a vocabulary commensurate with one's age.

The scales only fell from the eyes of HO87 Mk III when 6 months into his undergraduate course he discovered the richness of our language and found himself borrowing my much dog-eared 1966 copy of "The Queen's English".

Thx for that, m8.

Coupon-mad

I emailed the BPA this week about a case and took the chance to also tell Gemma Dorans that every single one of the hundreds of cases that I know of among the 4,000 stalled cases, turns upon much, much more than the GPEOL/Aziz test and Beavis. So they will all need to be assessed from scratch unless Beavis wins and after lip service being paid to 'adding more evidence' (hopefully) the entire lot get 'allowed' & cancelled.

I know of cases stayed since February where there has NEVER been an evidence pack from the PPC and despite emails to POPLA along the way, they remain in the stayed pile.

Also cases with no landowner authority in the evidence, or very heavily redacted authority, and even one where they sent the wrong contract and I was patiently waiting for POPLA to spot it; never happened yet.

And cases with no possibility of keeper liability due to no Notice to Keeper ever being served. And signage issues with evidence photos in daylight when the event was at night...the list goes on.

The BPA said there will be an opportunity to add comments after the Beavis case (no idea who will be assessing these but time will tell). Certainly at the moment we are at an impasse. What would be unacceptable would be if the cases are decided JUST on Beavis issues, despite the other matters in the appeal not being addressed, and/or if the ultimate decisions are not consistent with what 'old POPLA' would have said (e.g. heavily redacted contract or Fairlie v Fenton= no chance Mr PPC).

Anything less than an Assessment of the whole case, by Assessors who apply 'old POPLA' logic, would be a scandal. Maybe the BPA can pay the old Assessors to do the cases. People like Christopher Monk, Christopher Adamson & co., they'd be the best placed people to do the job consistently, in the same way that each decision 'should' have been made.

HO87

+1 Well said C-M

And of course the very same problem applies to the small claims cases stayed on the same basis - though of course a liverish old buffer of a DDJ can soon swim his way out of things.

I'm afraid I see no easy way out of the situation for the BPA unless they bite the bullet financially and employ a number of the ex-"Old POPLA" assessors on short-term contracts and get them to work through the lot. Then again those ex-assessors will only be available for a short time and the window of opportunity is closing rapidly...

danish57

Just to add to the above, here is my recent correspondence with the BPA (please read from bottom to top as this is a normal email string otherwise it may not make sense):


From: From: AOS
RE: Website Enquiry
Wed, Oct 7, 2015 BST
Dear Mr #######
Thank you for your e-mail.
Unfortunately, the company details are not yet available.
When your appeal is due to be heard, POPLA will contact you directly with the new contact details.
Kind regards,
AOS Investigations Team


Sent: 02 October 2015
To: AOS
Subject: RE: Website Enquiry
Dear Investigations Team
Thank you for responding to my email.
I appreciate your help in acting as a conduit for correspondence, however, I would be much obliged if you could provide me with the name of the company, their contact number and person responsible for appeals so that I may correspond with them directly.
Thank you
Mr #######

On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 BST AOS wrote:
Dear Mr #######
Thank you for your e-mail.
If your appeal has been registered with London Councils and you would like to submit further evidence, please send this, along with your verification code to [email]aos@britishparking.co.uk<mailto:aos@britishparking.co.uk[/email]> and we will ensure it is passed to the company who will deal with your appeal.
Kind regards,
AOS Investigations Team
From: info@britishparking.co.uk [mailto:info@britishparking.co.uk]
Sent: 01 October 2015

To: BPA-Info
Subject: Website Enquiry
Website Enquiry
Dear Sir or Madam
There are a huge amount of PoPLA appeals on hold from the old PoPLA Appeals Service. If possible, could you please advise how an individual with an appeal, that is currently not been processed by the old service, can continue submitting additional evidence to support their appeal. Further, could you please advise how these appeals are going to be processed now that the old service has been taken over by an ombudsman service. Yours faithfully Mr #########.

Grandad123

Hi Danish. Who is this 'POPLA' they are referring to who will contact us.


I presume it is the AOS using POPLA headed paper.


Thanks for the info CM you seem to have a good grasp of the situation. It worries me that it could go on add infinitum. I really want to get this sorted asap.


I am not clear what 'legal' obligation the BPA have to ensure that the appeals are heard properly. I want a big stick I can poke them with. The worst case scenario for me is if I get a letter from the PCC saying 'sorry' we didn't mean it really you invoice is cancelled.


If it's just part of there COP then it's worth lickty poo.