Parking Ticketing Limited

Quentin

When you "complain" in line with a formal complaints procedure then that should set out time frames for a reply.


Expecting a reply in 2 days is unreasonable though (eg insurance companies are allowed up to 8 weeks to reply to complaints)

mrsunnybunny

Quentin wrote: »

When you "complain" in line with a formal complaints procedure then that should set out time frames for a reply.


Expecting a reply in 2 days is unreasonable though (eg insurance companies are allowed up to 8 weeks to reply to complaints)

Obviously... They don't send an email to acknowledge receipt so I'm just trying to gauge at which point I need to get in touch

mrsunnybunny

Unbelievable

Thank you for contacting POPLA.

We note you are unhappy with our decision. However, we have now reached the end of our process and there is no opportunity to appeal.

Yours sincerely,

POPLA Team

Coupon-mad

Reply again and point out you were in fact raising an issue of procedural and 'understanding of the applicable law and liability' errors by the Assessor. Not 'unhappiness' with the decision - this is a matter you will be escalating to ISPA but you are aware POPLA have recently committed to re-hear cases where there are procedural errors. It is not possible to hold a registered keeper liable for a driver's PCN in the absence of a Notice to Keeper under the POFA and in the absence of any evidence that the person appealing (keeper only) is the individual who can be liable (driver only) - so you were expecting a re-hearing under the circs.

Address this one to 'Dear Mr Gallagher' (Lead Adjudicator).

mrsunnybunny

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Reply again and point out you were in fact raising an issue of procedural and 'understanding of the applicable law and liability' errors by the Assessor. Not 'unhappiness' with the decision - this is a matter you will be escalating to ISPA but you are aware POPLA have recently committed to re-hear cases where there are procedural errors. It is not possible to hold a registered keeper liable for a driver's PCN in the absence of a Notice to Keeper under the POFA and in the absence of any evidence that the person appealing (keeper only) is the individual who can be liable (driver only) - so you were expecting a re-hearing under the circs.

Address this one to 'Dear Mr Gallagher' (Lead Adjudicator).

Thanks, sent a reply along those lines and also complained to ISPA...

mrsunnybunny

This is absolutely ridiculous. I have complained to ISPA and they have gotten back to me, telling me that the correct processes were followed in the case which led to a fair outcome.

How is this possible?

1. No NTK, even though I was not the driver.
2. POPLA falsely states I was the driver even though I submitted evidence that I could not have been
3. No proper proof of right to operate on premises was provided. Yet POPLA states this was provided

!!!!!!?

beamerguy

mrsunnybunny wrote: »

This is absolutely ridiculous. I have complained to ISPA and they have gotten back to me, telling me that the correct processes were followed in the case which led to a fair outcome.

How is this possible?

1. No NTK, even though I was not the driver.
2. POPLA falsely states I was the driver even though I submitted evidence that I could not have been
3. No proper proof of right to operate on premises was provided. Yet POPLA states this was provided

!!!!!!?

Yes, total rubbish, the infamous Scrutiny board headed by Nicola Mullany.
You need to ask Nicola Mullany on what grounds do they think it was the correct process
No point using the word Scrutiny if they don't actually do that.

The ISPA seem to be falling into the same cesspit as the BPA

mrsunnybunny

beamerguy wrote: »

Yes, total rubbish, the infamous Scrutiny board headed by Nicola Mullany.
You need to ask Nicola Mullany on what grounds do they think it was the correct process
No point using the word Scrutiny if they don't actually do that.

The ISPA seem to be falling into the same cesspit as the BPA

So what's left to do now? Pay for having parked in my own bay, with a permit which was displayed, even though I was not the driver and no NTK was served, all to an operator who doesn't even have a contract to operate on the premises??

Fruitcake

mrsunnybunny wrote: »

So what's left to do now? Pay for having parked in my own bay, with a permit which was displayed, even though I was not the driver and no NTK was served, all to an operator who doesn't even have a contract to operate on the premises??

Either wait and see if they are stupid enough to issue court papers, or even challenge them to it. Come on if you think you are hard enough!

Complaints to the landowner and your MP, spread the word on social media, local and national press.

beamerguy

mrsunnybunny wrote: »

So what's left to do now? Pay for having parked in my own bay, with a permit which was displayed, even though I was not the driver and no NTK was served, all to an operator who doesn't even have a contract to operate on the premises??

I agree with Fruitcake, they would be stupid to go further especially as they have no contract. Judges do not like fake claims

Disgusting that POPLA and ISPA missed that ?

I would re-open this with the ISPA