POPLA rejected appeal!

itsandrewmyers

Hi guys, so I've had the dreaded Popla appeal rejected this morning. I originally appealed this in July 2015 and a response is only provided today. I used a template I found on here and tweaked it slightly but it clearly didn't work. You can see my previous thread a year ago to get a run down on the story. I will also post their recent response below:

"We have been appointed by the British Parking Association (“BPA”) to act as an independent appeals body,
under the brand of Parking on Private Land Appeals (“POPLA”), in respect of the Appeal and to consider
both the Appellants and the Car Park Operator’s positions before providing a decision to the parties. We are
not instructed to act on behalf of either party.
We confirm that we have considered the appeal, taking into account all of the evidence at hand and applying
the prevailing legislation and with reference to the BPA Code of Practice, and have decided to reject the
Appeal on this occasion. To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to
the Car Park Operator in the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice (“PCN”) will not be cancelled.
Reasons for dismissing the Appeal
• The Appellant stated in the Appeal that the amount of the parking charge is unreasonable. Pursuant
to the guidance set out in the Supreme Court’s decision in ParkingEye v Beavis and in accordance
with the BPA Code of Practice, a reasonable charge would be £100.00. As the charge the Car Park
Operator has imposed is equal to or less than £100.00, we have no option but to reject the Appeal.
• The Appellant has stated in the Appeal that the signage at the car park is not adequate and that they
were unaware that they had entered into a contract by remaining at the location. Upon reviewing the
evidence provided by both parties we contend that the signage is adequate and does comply with
the BPA Code of Practice. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.
• The Appellant has requested evidence that the Car Park Operator has a legal right to manage the
site. We are in receipt of sufficient evidence from the Car Park Operator to satisfy us that the Car Park
Operator does have a legal right to manage parking at this location and to issue Parking Charge
Notices. Accordingly, the Appeal is rejected.
To the Appellant
To avoid further action, including Court action, the Appellant can make payment to the Car Park Operator in
*****
the next 28 days. The Parking Charge Notice will not be cancelled.
To the Car Park Operator
As the Appeal has been rejected, you must allow the Appellant 28 days to make payment. If payment is not
forthcoming, you may take further action to recover the PCN.
This is the final decision in this Appeal. We are not able to respond to any future correspondence from either
party, nor are we able to provide any information to either party over the telephone. "

I have since had a rude call from Debt Recovery Plus demanding £100.00 and also an email saying I have 14 days to pay this which obviously contradicts the above information from Popla.

I am seriously panicking as I cannot afford for this to go to court. Please can someone assist me with this?

TIA

Andrew

DoaM

Ah, so this was a WHOPLA (Wright Hassell) ruling and not a POPLA (Ombudsman Services) ruling. The ruling isn't binding on the motorist, and court isn't a scary place ... think more Judge Rinder but without the theatrics.

Debt collectors can be ignored. Please go and read the NEWBIES sticky again - this is all covered. IF a claim is subsequently made then come back - it can still be easily defended.

Who was the PPC?

itsandrewmyers

Sorry I'm clueless with this stuff. The reply came from Popla or so it looked like it did. What does this mean then? Shall I completely ignore it?

Where can I find the thread from?

Thanks

Redx

this was definitely not POPLA , its Wright Hassell , ACTING FOR THE bpa , we named them WHOPLA , so its a WHOPLA DECISION , NOT BINDING UPON YOU

check the paperwork you copied and pasted , its WRIGHT HASSELL and telling you that the BPA apponted them to deal with about 4000 old popla cases from 2015 , so from around this time last year , as you say

they have rejected your old appeal

here is your old thread

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5297957

probably JD PARKING SERVICES (or Consultants) and PCS were probably involved too

like some other ones seen recently on here or on pepipoo

itsandrewmyers

Ah I see. What would you recommend doing next then? Shall I pay to avoid any chance of this going further or hold off?

Umkomaas

itsandrewmyers wrote: »

Ah I see. What would you recommend doing next then? Shall I pay to avoid any chance of this going further or hold off?

You haven't told us who the PPC is, some are litigious, some are not. But we can't read minds to answer your question. Less is definitely less if you want us to help!

The_Deep

I am seriously panicking as I cannot afford for this to go to court.


If you play your cards right, and you do have a good hand, the end result of a court case could be the judge finding for you and it will not cost you a penny. The PPC may even be ordered to pay you money.


The adjudication you had was not top drawer 24 carat, WH have issues with a conflict of interest.


Stop panicking and get reading how you can throw a spanner in their gearbox.

DoaM

<shakes head in despair>

PAY?!? Nobody here would recommend paying a DEBT COLLECTOR! They are toothless and have no authority; they won't be "sending the boys around" or anything like that.

Stay in IGNORE mode; file and forget anything you receive EXCEPT a letter before claim or actual court papers.

fisherjim

Never ever speak to debt collectors, put their number on a block list if possible. Or buy a whistle!

itsandrewmyers

It was JD Parking consultant

Umkomaas

itsandrewmyers wrote: »

It was JD Parking consultant

They've never tried court as far as we know.

http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/JD_Parking_Consultants.html

Do a forum search here on 'JD court' (don't include the term 'Parking' or you'll get zillions of posts showing as virtually every one has 'parking' in them). Change the 'Show threads' default to 'Show posts' for a more comprehensive return.

You will see no court cases to date.