Help Greatly Received; Parking Ticket Issued At Milnrow Metrolink Station.

Redx

pappa_golf wrote: »

why are POPLa adjudicating , all cases regarding bylaws are supposed to be on hold

exactly what I was thinking

add that to the rebuttals , that the land is not relevant land and all POPLA appeals are on hold pending the decision

see here http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/railway-byelaw-fiaso-warming-up.html

pappa_golf

and I would like to say that by sending a 45 page demand for money , stating reasons for "demanding" monies goes against POPLa,s statement that the operator should cease to chase up money once a bylaw case has been established , the words "metrolink" and "non applicable land" should have been a hint to POPLa

Northlakes

Care aren't claiming keeper liability under POFA anyway but in my opinion it's very questionable in law that they can issues a PCN which is in fact a 'pay us £100 and we won't tell' (Bribery Act 2010 according to a comment in the Times) It doesn't stop there. Is the landowner not Network Rail rather than the train operator. The byelaw comes about because the land is under the ownership of the railway network not the operator in my opinion.

I would like to see some legal opinion on this.

pappa_golf

can bylaws be over ridden by simply renting the land out?

Umkomaas

the words "metrolink" and "non applicable land" should have been a hint to POPLa

That presupposes former call centre staff, failed nail technicians and soft !!!!!! authors understand any of this stuff!

pappa_golf

https://popla.co.uk/faqs-and-advice

There are approximately 30 POPLA trained assessors from various backgrounds with many years of dispute resolution experience. Our impartial POPLA assessors go through a rigorous recruitment process and are subject to an intensive training scheme prior to working live cases. After a robust accreditation process, assessors have regular quality assurance checks on their work to ensure that processes are being followed correctly and decision accuracy remains high. Your appeal will be independently reviewed by one of our professional assessors taking into consideration the relevant law, guidance and standards and the BPA Code of Practice.


Relevant land is defined in paragraph 3 of Schedule 4 of
the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which enables you
to seek keeper liability. You will only be able to seek keeper
liability and take advantage of the other provisions in the
Schedule if the land is ‘relevant land’. ‘Relevant land’ excludes
a public highway, a parking place provided or controlled by
a traffic authority, and land over which there is statutory
control. See paragraph 3 of Schedule 4 for the details.

2.13 The Code does not cover on-street or off-street car
parking control and enforcement led by local authorities
and regulated by, for example:
• the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984
• the Road Traffic Act 1991
• the Traffic Management Act 2004.
These are covered by detailed statutory control and
regulation and can include:
• immobilisation
• removal of vehicles
• issuing penalty charge notices and excess charge
notices.
2.14 Standards of conduct and practice for AOS members are laid
out in the Code, but if there is any conflict the law will prevail.

Redx

I would have thought it was the TOC that owned the stations (or Metrolink)

either way , its a byelaws land and so POPLA should be staying these cases pending the current review , ditto for airports and ports too (like APCOA and BHA and LUTON etc )

Northlakes

pappa_golf wrote: »

can bylaws be over ridden by simply renting the land out?

That is the question I would like answered. Like a trespass case, should the claim come from the landowner or is it a one where there is sufficient interest in the land?

pappa_golf

this has been the crux at JLA , where VCS say bylaws are no longer in use , howver LCC state that bylaws are in force and have never been amended or removed

edited:

That is the question I would like answered. Like a trespass case, should the claim come from the landowner or is it a one where there is sufficient interest in the land?

the answer should be "s*d off" I do not accept you letter asking for me to bribe you instead of paying a trespass charge to the landowner

at that stage , it can no longer be a parking charge , and POPLa cannot get involved , therefor no popla , no ticket by PPC , or action by the PPC , as they have obtained info without due cause

eatapeach

I'm in a similar situation - parked at 7am in the dark at Metrolink park and ride, came back the next morning to find a PCN on the windscreen.

The difference is that they have made a mistake on the PCN as the car details are wrong - they put the wrong reg number on the PCN.
If they look at their own images they will spot the typo.

Does this just add to the defence if/when it goes to POPLA? Or do I proceed differently and see if they get their act together with the DVLA and issue a letter to the registered keepers address?