Popla nightmare

bod1467

No ... CP Plus may send you an evidence pack in response to your POPLA appeal.

dawn403

bod1467 wrote: »

No ... CP Plus may send you an evidence pack in response to your POPLA appeal.

Oh right, sorry bit rubbish at this. Ok I will look out for that. I have submitted the appeal now, so fingers crossed. Thanks again for everyone's help.

ampersand

dawn - you still called it a 'f - - -' yesterday, #21, and you know that's not allowed.
You received a speculative/try-it-on invoice.

Have you gone back to Moto? Given the circs, someone should remember an all day parked car/flat tyre incident[if staff turnover dopesn't defeat this] despite it being in June.
c-m is correct: they DO have a better record for instructing cancellation for ticket victims than many.
I wouldn't just be leaving it to Appeal via the new lot. You need to take the initiative.
Moto certainly need some love:
http://motorwayservicesonline.co.uk/Moto

dawn403

Hello me again.
I have received my evidence pack now. I have no idea what comments I need to make in response to it. They have only answered three of the appeal points. They stated that the preestimate of loss is not a lawful appeal point, they showed a letter from Moto stating their contract and ability to act for the land owner, and they said their signs are suitable and visible.
Do I comment that they have provided no proof that I was actually parked?
Thanks again

dawn403

I managed to find information and other letters to help me with commenting on their 'evidence pack' however I did not see that using the beavis case is now not a valid argument under GPEOL unless you can show differences. Therefore I have included it in my comments. I am worried that including it in my response will go against my chance of winning the appeal?