Ethical Parking CBC and Brighton & Hove Council

Fruitcake

Have you made the common error of setting up the dropbox account in your own name?

There is a note saying that *Fred Bloggs* will be notified when you view the pdf documents.

*Fred Bloggs* is a stage name of the real user name, Mr AS.

The 'phone number on the sign an payment 'phone number on the NTK are prohibited premium rate numbers.

Iguana_En_Fuego

Thanks for the heads up, think I have changed the name to match the profile on here (let me know if it works). However 'Mr AS' to all intents and purposes may as well have been a stage name itself. I have no concern about that, as I am (truthfully) totally removed from the case under discussion and only helping a friend of a friend.

Fruitcake

Live link.

http://dropbox.com/sh/7usssvuopl1q5iy/AACzngpc__3j0tSNCQboFn8Ka?dl=0

The name change has worked.

Coupon-mad

Iguana_En_Fuego wrote: »

Thanks for the heads up, think I have changed the name to match the profile on here (let me know if it works). However 'Mr AS' to all intents and purposes may as well have been a stage name itself. I have no concern about that, as I am (truthfully) totally removed from the case under discussion and only helping a friend of a friend.

Ah, Ingram Crescent area; I know that place and have a relative not far away. :cool:

The RK posted the BPA Template challenge to Ethical on 22/02/17 and received the expected rejection letter dated 23/02/17 on 25/02/17. A valid POLPA code has been issued

Good.

And did you notice Ethical bury the POPLA code with no explanation on page two, not page one with an explanation & website, as required in the BPA CoP?

Somewhere I have an Ethical POPLA appeal that they futilely tried to contest last year. LOL. No hope. Signage was pants but I also included the usual no landowner authority, no keeper liability, the appellant was not been shown to be the individual liable, plus pointing out the POPLA code being utterly hidden as a random number at the end of a sentence on page 2. And you have the extra point that this is not 'relevant land' as it is under statutory control and your evidence proves the council own this estate.

Show us your draft and I'll dig out the one I wrote last year to compare (was not the same location).

Iguana_En_Fuego

Thank you C-M,
Just a quick check-in during lunch.
Being 'conditioned' to the ways of PPC's, I had a very good idea of what I was looking for and located the POPLA code quite quickly. Although to the unaware, it would just have been some random typo-error. In this regard, is this just a breach of the BPA CoP (and worthy of a complaint / dismissal to / by the BPA?) or a point worth raising in the POPLA appeal?
I will construct the appeal based on the main points of:
1) Not Relevant Land - no keeper liability
2) Keeper not the Driver, keeper not liable
3) No Land Owner Authority
4) Signage (as newbies thread)
5) ? Hidden POPLA code
6) ...Other relevant points in the newbies POPLA guide.

Look forward to comparing notes soon!

Coupon-mad

Being 'conditioned' to the ways of PPC's, I had a very good idea of what I was looking for and located the POPLA code quite quickly. Although to the unaware, it would just have been some random typo-error. In this regard, is this just a breach of the BPA CoP (and worthy of a complaint / dismissal to / by the BPA?) or a point worth raising in the POPLA appeal?

Both. Worthy of a complaint because it's a clear breach of the CoP, and worth including as a POPLA point to focus their minds on how this letter looks to a lay person. Like you I spotted the POPLA code easily because I was looking for it, in the BHA Fan's case where I wrote the POPLA appeal for them(!) but then I realised it was awfully hidden, checked the CoP and found it MUST be on page 1 with an explanation/website link for POPLA, etc.

Iguana_En_Fuego

I have put a draft POPLA appeal in the original drop box link.

Out of interest, I also have a copy of the parking permit application form from BHCC, if it has any relevance to the case in point, I am not too sure.

I am currently going through the BPA CoP breaches, there are probably many more, but will it be necessary to list all / most of them, or is there sufficient already?

Coupon-mad

Fruitcake wrote: »

Live link.

http://dropbox.com/sh/7usssvuopl1q5iy/AACzngpc__3j0tSNCQboFn8Ka?dl=0

The name change has worked.

Very very nice POPLA appeal there - I don't think you need any more. I would expect Ethical to try to contest it, as they did in some I did for people last year; not sure why they bothered because their evidence is hopeless - and in one case the landowner signature date was altered by years - but that's another story.

Brill POPLA appeal, they will struggle and you will have fun with pulling their evidence apart.

Iguana_En_Fuego

Thank you for the compliments C-M, much appreciated. I will run the RK through the appeal and get itloaded onto POPLA asap.

Hopefully this will be uncontested at POPLA, however rebutting EPM's 'evidence' if presented, whilst time consuming, would be an interesting diversion!

Iguana_En_Fuego

So as predicted by C-M, EPM have submitted their 'evidence' today (appeal submitted 9th march). Along with copies of the original photos, they have included copies of the PCN, NTK, RK Appeal and Appeal Rejection. They have also included a copy of the BHCC Contract and 'Council Letter', copies of which I shall upload to the original drop box. So, far from an easy win, a bit more effort required! Interestingly, EPM have copied the RK direct in their e-mail to POPLA.
Getting a bit out of depth here, so if any one can have quick look at the Contract and Letter and offer pointers, it would be appreciated.