"Old" POPLA Appeal- current situation?

Gadfium

Morning all,

I'm sure that I saw a thread on here a while back, but I am blowed if I can find it again.:o

Does anyone know what the current situation is regarding appeals made under "old" POPLA? I had a spurious invoice from PE about this time last year. An appeal was lodges under POPLA, but I now can't get any updates. I did write to the BPA as per the POPLA site but they cannot offer any updates.

I've not heard from Parking Lie since they sent me the POPLA evidence pack, so I am not sure what the next step is? Sit tight, do nothing and see how they sort the mess out?

Umkomaas

Still on hold.

Read through the related blogs from the Parking Prankster via this link to give you the details we were last made aware of:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-min=2015-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2016-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=50

And here's the MSE thread you were searching for:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5336635

All you can do is sit tight (unless you want to pay! :rotfl:).

HTH

Gadfium

Umkomaas wrote: »

Still on hold.

Read through the related blogs from the Parking Prankster via this link to give you the details we were last made aware of:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/search?updated-min=2015-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2016-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=50

And here's the MSE thread you were searching for:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5336635

Thanks for the reply. The PP info is useful.

Umkomaas wrote: »

unless you want to pay! :rotfl:

Thank you for the kind offer, but on this occasion I must decline :)

Edna_Basher

Yes, the Prankster's blog makes for an interesting read, especially the copies of the letters between Nicola Mullany (Chair of ISPA) and Patrick Troy (CEO of the BPA).

ISPA are still in the process of gathering evidence to support their belief that many of the outstanding cases from the "Old" POPLA days were not properly considered before being adjourned. The more evidence that ISPA receives of this, the better.

If your own POPLA appeal was not solely dependent on the outcome of the Beavis case and contained other valid reasons for it to be allowed (e.g. non-compliance with POFA, no evidence of landowner authority, inadequate signage), you could provide ISPA (nicola.mullany@ispa.co.uk) with the details of your case. This may mean you would have a better chance of your own case being considered fully, properly and fairly.

We've already alerted ISPA to our own 4 outstanding "Old" POPLA appeals, all of which could (and should) have been allowed.

hoohoo

Yes, please follow Edna's advice and contact director@ispa.co.uk to explain why your POPLA case is not the same as Beavis

Gadfium

Edna_Basher wrote: »

Yes, the Prankster's blog makes for an interesting read, especially the copies of the letters between Nicola Mullany (Chair of ISPA) and Patrick Troy (CEO of the BPA).

ISPA are still in the process of gathering evidence to support their belief that many of the outstanding cases from the "Old" POPLA days were not properly considered before being adjourned. The more evidence that ISPA receives of this, the better.

If your own POPLA appeal was not solely dependent on the outcome of the Beavis case and contained other valid reasons for it to be allowed (e.g. non-compliance with POFA, no evidence of landowner authority, inadequate signage), you could provide ISPA (nicola.mullany@ispa.co.uk) with the details of your case. This may mean you would have a better chance of your own case being considered fully, properly and fairly.

We've already alerted ISPA to our own 4 outstanding "Old" POPLA appeals, all of which could (and should) have been allowed.

My appeal does not rely solely on a GPEOL.

ampersand

The ''too hard'' box at new POPLA is overflowing.

re: Crapita, Dumpster Times report thus:
You are here: FE Trustnet Fund managers
Manager factsheet
Capita Financial Managers Ltd

FE Trustnet verdict
Overall, performing worse than the peer group composite. Over a long track record, the manager has underperformed the peer group more often than not. There is not sufficient data to say whether good stockpicking has had any real effect on results, which have not been particularly exposed to falling markets.
#
No wonder they've expanded into debt-collecting.......

leeda84

I'm still waiting on 2 of mine that were with the "old" POPLA and due to be decided on or after 4th September (UKPC PCNs)

I have probably missed it but is there an article or post anywhere with the Beavis outcome main points written in Laymen's terms? I didn't follow it too closely so I don't know the full details of the case and reading the Supreme Judge's summing up/decision/report is mind-numbing. TIA

The_Deep

Wouldn't if be wonderful if all 4,000 wrote thusly to ISPA?

Grandad123

I'm confused as usual and I'm not sure what writing to the ISPA would achieve.


I thought the ISPA were supposed to be monitoring POPLA anyway. They didn't do much of that for London Councils by the look of it.


I have had no proper response from the AOS or the BPA. It's like emailing morons. They answer a question, but not the one I ask.


I don't expect anyone has 'Proof' that the appeals have not been looked at, only 'strong suspicions'.


By the way Mr D.
I thought I would annoy the PPC as I discovered they had no planning permission. It came unstuck as the planners decided it was 'enclosed ground' and no permission was needed. That's a good one.

Coupon-mad

No, we know the appeals have not been assessed. Some of us have pointed out clear-cut cases to the BPA who ignored them. I know of cases with the wrong contract, wrong witness statement and no landowner authority at all. No Assessor at old POPLA would have missed those, but a clerk having a cursory look through cases for easy wins may well have.

There's also an email POPLA sent out in April to those PE appellants whose cases dated prior to Easter. Here's what it said:


''The operator in your case has applied for an adjournment, pending a decision of the Court of Appeal which they say has relevance to your own appeal. The case is ParkingEye Limited v Beavis (B2/2014/2010).

The Lead Adjudicator has already granted a similar application in a small number of cases. Your appeal was not due for determination when the application was made and has not yet been considered in any way. Your case will be adjourned for 28 days.

If either party want a further adjournment after 28 days then the matter will be considered further. The operator should still submit evidence in the usual way at this stage.

It is likely that there will be widespread publicity when the Court of Appeal decision is known. However, in any event, should either party wish to make further representations following that decision, they will be able to do so and the other party will have the opportunity to comment on them.

Your appeal will now be considered on or soon after 21 May 2015 .

Yours sincerely
POPLA Administrative Team''

http://legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?62985-PCN-Parking-Eye-Appeal-denied-Now-POPLA-Appeal-or-pay


See post #11. The email was not a one-off. I saw that email a few times myself.

There were also a number of what Steve Clark at the BPA called 'work in progress' (WIP) cases received in the weeks before POPLA stopped. None of those were considered in any way and the BPA admitted that and they are in a separate pile. Yet not mentioned now...who will assess those 'WIP' cases then?