go back to 2012

pappa_golf

when the POFa came in , and the BPA set up an appeals service (no IPC then) was not one of the terms that they had an appeals scrutiny panel , without which they could not continue?


I note the ISPA is effectively no more , 40% or staff resigned and no chair person

Castle

pappa_golf wrote: »

when the POFa came in , and the BPA set up an appeals service (no IPC then) was not one of the terms that they had an appeals scrutiny panel , without which they could not continue?

Well remembered; and confirmed by the BPA in May of 2012, (see point 5 at the top of page 2). However, this letter also said all tickets issued by a BPA member shall be required to offer the appeals service; (so no mention of excluding Scotland, NI or Byelaw events).

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225767/1205-independent-appeals-service.pdf

pappa_golf

we propose to transfer ,,,,,,,,,,,,


not quite independent , when ISPA staff are paid for by the BPA and have a broom cupboard at BPA headquarters


I would say a lack of IPSA should stop POPLa

pappa_golf

interesting when you look at the 3 remaining board members


Manny Rasores de Toro thought that name rang a bell


https://uk.linkedin.com/in/mannyrasoresdetoro


yup , a BPA director , https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/7f2uHQbeoYVApEMcPvLMBbpjymI/appointments

Half_way

And when the Odious IPC weasels came on scene all talk of an independent scrutiny board was flushed down the toilet.

and to top it all they are claiming this on their so called appeals page:

The Independent Appeals Service is approved by Government under the Alternative Dispute Resolution for Consumer Disputes (Competent Authorities and Information) Regulations 2015.

Its about time the CTSI was informed of every issue with this set up, and if someone chooses to go to the IAS the CTSI should be informed of their failings, as all it does is bring the CTSI into disrepute.

Fruitcake

Half_way wrote: »

And when the Odious IPC weasels came on scene all talk of an independent scrutiny board was flushed down the toilet.

and to top it all they are claiming this on their so called appeals page:


Its about time the CTSI was informed of every issue with this set up, and if someone chooses to go to the IAS the CTSI should be informed of their failings, as all it does is bring the CTSI into disrepute.

One of the biggest failings is the IAS do not name their assessors. The UK Government ADR 2015 quite clearly states that the assessors must be named.

peter_the_piper

So I presume that the legal requirement still applies therefore when the likes of Thieves and co go to debt collectors/Mcol you have a get out in that the rules have not been followed.