"Old" POPLA Appeal- current situation?

Parkrage

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

Who are 'we'? i.e. Does it include mine which was from ParkingEye at Tower Road, Newquay?

Edna_Basher

Hi Parkrage

The "we" just refers to the company I work for. The 4 POPLA cases relate to our own disputes concerning PCNs issued to our company's vehicles.

If your own POPLA case contained potential winning appeal points other than GPEOL / commercial justification, then I think it would be worthwhile for you to contact ISPA too. If nothing else, this should increase your chances of having your own appeal fully and fairly considered.

Grandad123

Hi Edna


The problem is we are dealing with a completely unregulated 'industry'.


We are totally reliant on the muppets at the BPA and their unenforceable and useless so called COP.


In reality they could tear up our appeals and flush them down the toilet and nobody would give a monkeys. All our rights also went down the pan as soon as the warden stuck a ticket on our windscreens.


We are totally at the behest of a bunch of idiots and all we can do is wait until they decide whether to send us a bill or not.

Edna_Basher

Hi Grandad123

I totally agree that time after time, this "industry" has demonstrated that it is incapable of regulating itself.

I also agree that the BPA's plans to "fast track" the 4,000 outstanding cases through an adjudication process limited only to consideration of Beavis would result in most appeals being lost (metaphorically speaking, being flushed down the toilet). That would be the ideal scenario for the BPA - a low cost process and a happy membership.

However, I don't agree that we're at the total behest of the BPA. Although the BPA may still try the "fast track" approach in cases where they think they can get away with it, I expect that they also have a pile of appeals labelled "these ones bite" for which they know that they won't be able to pull a fast one.

You need to make sure that your appeal is in the "these ones bite" pile. Writing to ISPA would be a good start.

Coupon-mad

Writing to ISPA is really important because they ARE trying to show that the BPA is wrong and they are doing that right now.

soton_25

My letter to IPSA... sent today 24 Jan 2015




Dear Sir/Madam,

I read in the media with some worry Patrick Troy and the BPA's latest proposal for hearing my POPLA appeal ######. I write to you to inform your organisation was to why I feel the approach being espoused to assess my case is neither full, proper or fair. I ask that you take action in this regard, not only in respect of my case, but the near 4000 other such cases in undetermined status post the Beavis Supreme Court judgement and the transfer of POPLA from London Councils to the Ombudsmen Service.

It would appear the BPA are proposing to assess my case only on the Genuine Pre-Estimate of Loss (GPEOL) ground in my POPLA appeal. A letter from London Councils (POPLA) dated 2 Oct 2015 suggests my case has no other ground on which my appeal can be determined. This is patently false, even following a cursory assessment at my case. I believe the letter referred to, to be a generic mailing and not in any way directly addressing the detailed issues of my case.

My reason for thinking the BPA proposed approach is unfair is that I have a least one prima facie ground outside of GPEOL that would allow an assessor to find in my favour. For instance, as an example, the Notice to Keeper is non compliant with Act of Parliament POFA2012 and therefore there is no registered keeper liability by statue. As I have refused to name the driver and no Notice to Driver was issued, I cannot be perused as registered keeper.

If the BPA are allowed to proceed with their proposal, natural justice will not be served, reputations will be damaged, the court service of the United Kingdom will be further burdened needlessly, and credibility in the private parking industry will be further limited.

Once again I ask you to act on behalf of the consumer, the motorist and the general public. I very much look forward to your confirmation of receipt of my letter (e-mail) and your informed reply.

Coupon-mad

Great stuff, another case with no NTK at all, which we know from dozens of other decisions in the public domain that any LondonCouncils POPLA Assessor would have agreed with, had they assessed the case.

It is patently obvious they did not and the BPA's actions are a complete scandal. I recall showing them similar cases with absolute nailed-on grounds for the appellant to have won the appeal and they thanked me for them then, it seems, ignored them.

Shame on whoever is responsible.

soton_25

Oh and by the way, sent something similar to Patrick Troy "Maclure" and colleagues at BPA. For all the good it will do. But made me feel better.


Will update my personal case thread later. Thanks for the support C-M... enjoying joining on your's, Edna and Prankster's fight on this one.

soton_25

BTW in case anyone is wondering - they got my NTK dates spectacularly wrong. Right if they had a NTD, but they don't, cos the carpark is ANPR based. Eeegits.

Edna_Basher

soton_25 wrote: »

Oh and by the way, sent something similar to Patrick Troy "Maclure" and colleagues at BPA.

Excellent stuff, soton_25.

Go get 'em, Floyd