Railway Bylaws and PPCs

pappa_golf

I thought this was down to the goverment/DVLA ?

any official reports or updates from them?

in the POPLa statement it says

that we did not have the remit to consider if a Byelaw had been breached.

After considering our position,

is this the official goverment stance , or are POPLa just doing what THEY want

Half_way

POPLA will do as the BPA tells them

pappa_golf

Half_way wrote: »

POPLA will do as the BPA tells them

but ,,, but ,, they are independent:rotfl:

pappa_golf

a wander back thru FOI request reviel a lot that have simply not been answered

for example
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/355066/response/873336/attach/html/3/FOIR5531%20Susan%20Fletcher.pdf.html

in which , the DVLA clearly (cop out) state "The scope and application of the Railway Byelaws is a matter between Train
Operating Companies and the Department for Transport. "

annoyingly POPLa have set themselves up in a position that they will not answer FOI requests , so I suppose we will never see the letter from the Department for Transport authorising the use of POPLa

Umkomaas

annoyingly POPLa have set themselves up in a position that they will not answer FOI requests , so I suppose we will never see the letter from the Department for Transport authorising the use of POPLa

Not from a FOI to POPLA, but the DfT would have to respond.

Castle

pappa_golf wrote: »

annoyingly POPLa have set themselves up in a position that they will not answer FOI requests , so I suppose we will never see the letter from the Department for Transport authorising the use of POPLa

All the relevant documentation can be found here:-
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-appeals-service-for-parking-on-private-land

Umkomaas

Castle wrote: »

All the relevant documentation can be found here:-
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-appeals-service-for-parking-on-private-land

All the stuff there relates to old POPLA.

trisontana

A very interesting comment on PP's blog:-

Where Byelaws apply, the £100 charge is an offered contract. "You pay us £100, we promise not to prosecute". There is no law anywhere that says an offered contract must be accepted. So no liability for anyone to pay this £100. Not the driver. Not the keeper. Not the owner. Nobody. Doesn't POPLA understand this? They cannot adjudicate because there is nothing to adjudicate on. They clearly have no remit to make decisions in regard to a criminal prosecution for a Byelaw breach, because this must take place in a Magistrate's Court.

So nothing to do with POPLA or the small-claims-court, and (I think) it would be up to the railway company and not the PPC to bring this case to court.

pappa_golf

POPLa should now be treated as a 3-4 mth hindrance with a cost of £27 by the PPC , as they know bylaw cases cannot be heard in the CC , they will simply back out of POPLa and save £27


if POPLa find in favour of the PPC , in favour of what ? there was no offence

pappa_golf

the update popla page

POPLA has taken the decision to consider the cases previously adjourned due to Byelaws. We initially placed these appeals on hold after receiving complaints that we did not have the remit to consider if a Byelaw had been breached. After considering our position, we feel it is important to offer an appeal service to motorists so that they can have an independent assessment made

they seem to have returned and answered a question that was not asked


"receiving complaints that we did not have the remit to consider if a Byelaw had been breached."


No the question was , is railway land applicable under POFa2012 and they have not answered that