Parking Eye - Lying on evidence to POPLA

Coupon-mad

Fantastic.

And your MP, and Marcus Jones of the DCLG should be informed (seeing as he is mulling over regulation of the private parking firms and we don't want Govt to think ParkingEye are whiter than white just because they won the Beavis case and just because they are influential, owned by Crapita and their men in suits know how to 'talk the talk').

rhodes73

I had a response from my MP to state that they have contact ParkingEye about getting the ticket cancelled.
I also heard back from Neil Higginson who is Practice Business Manager at the Health Centre and i am pleased to say he has now cancelled the ticket. He believes that someone local may have covered up the signs! I'll leave that to everyone else to make up there own minds.......

I've also just had an email back from POPLA after complaining stating :

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your recent email.

Please note that our lead adjudicator, John Gallagher, believes that a procedural error has taken place during the assessment of this appeal.
As such, he has asked that I review the decision made.
Please be mindful that this may not necessarily mean that the decision will change.
I will be in touch in due course with my findings.

Bit late now but I'm going to see where this leads..... will keep this thread updated.

Guys_Dad

rhodes73 wrote: »

I've also just had an email back from POPLA after complaining stating :

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your recent email.

Please note that our lead adjudicator, John Gallagher, believes that a procedural error has taken place during the assessment of this appeal.
As such, he has asked that I review the decision made.
Please be mindful that this may not necessarily mean that the decision will change.
I will be in touch in due course with my findings.
.

One to be framed and hung. You won't find many more !

Coupon-mad

rhodes73 wrote: »

I had a response from my MP to state that they have contact ParkingEye about getting the ticket cancelled.
I also heard back from Neil Higginson who is Practice Business Manager at the Health Centre and i am pleased to say he has now cancelled the ticket. He believes that someone local may have covered up the signs! I'll leave that to everyone else to make up there own minds.......

We have! So he reckons that was done to every sign by a person who was unauthorised to do so, stayed like that for months yet no-one in the Clinic noticed it. Errrrmmm...methinks they don't like the bad publicity this dreadful, inadvisable 'parking enforcement' contract has caused them.

Serves them right for the way they treated the other patients in that other thread and for allowing PE to actually SUE patients - what the Hell is the matter with whoever signed that contract, could they not read the NHS Govt Policy on NHS car parks? Where is their due diligence and duty of care to patients whose data is being handed to a third party, who profit from ill people and aggressively sue? This is why this sort of regime has been disallowed under Govt policy for over 3 years!

Did they not even notice that ANPR cameras don't/can't check disabled bays either and make NO reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010 (e.g. the need for some people to be allowed more time to go about the same day to day business?)

Not fit for purpose, not parking management.

beamerguy

rhodes73 wrote: »

I had a response from my MP to state that they have contact ParkingEye about getting the ticket cancelled.
I also heard back from Neil Higginson who is Practice Business Manager at the Health Centre and i am pleased to say he has now cancelled the ticket. He believes that someone local may have covered up the signs! I'll leave that to everyone else to make up there own minds.......

I've also just had an email back from POPLA after complaining stating :

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your recent email.

Please note that our lead adjudicator, John Gallagher, believes that a procedural error has taken place during the assessment of this appeal.
As such, he has asked that I review the decision made.
Please be mindful that this may not necessarily mean that the decision will change.
I will be in touch in due course with my findings.

Bit late now but I'm going to see where this leads..... will keep this thread updated.

That is good news :T

"John Gallagher, believes that a procedural error has taken place during the assessment of this appeal."

I wonder just how many procedural errors POPLA make.
Really does show a big black hole in POPLA

"Neil Higginson who is Practice Business Manager at the Health Centre and i am pleased to say he has now cancelled the ticket."

Is Neil Higginson on commission ?
He could have done that from day one.
Maybe Neil Higginson should be investigated

rhodes73

So i've heard back from POPLA.... They have admitted they got it wrong and changed the decision! Have a read of the email sent below.....See if you can spot where they apologise for the stress and time spent fighting this case.
I'm going to ring them later and raise a few points, if you have any genuine questions please let me know and ill try and ask them.

Good morning,

Thank you for your recent email.

I appreciate your email was marked for the attention of John Gallagher, our Lead Adjudicator; however, I discussed your appeal at length with John yesterday as I explained in my email to you yesterday afternoon. John has requested that I respond to you on his behalf.

Please be mindful that as POPLA is a one stage process, there is no opportunity to appeal against our decision. We will, however, ensure that the correct decision has been made. Only if a procedural error has occurred would we look to make any changes.

In light of your comments made, I have reviewed the decision made by the assessor and more importantly, the rationale behind how that decision was made. Both John and I agree that in your appeal, a procedural error has taken place.

In terms of POPLA appeals, we are very much a one stage process. By this, I mean that we allow each party one opportunity to present their case to us and we allow each party one opportunity to rebut the other party’s evidence.

In this instance, I can see that in your grounds for appeal to POPLA, you stated that the signage displayed on site was taped up and therefore, pivotal information was covered up. You provided your own photographs of a sign which demonstrated your version of events.

In response to your grounds for appeal, the operator provided its own photographic evidence, where no tape was found on the signs.

Once an operator provides POPLA with its case file of evidence, an automated email is sent out to the appellant to advise them that they too will receive a copy of this case file. At this point, we invite the appellant to provide us with any comments in relation to the case file. Typically, this tends to be anything that the appellant would like to bring to our attention or anything that they want to highlight within the case file itself.

On this occasion, I can see that you provided your comments to us and you included photographs of the same sign that you had initially submitted along with your appeal, which still contained tape. You also provided more signs which had been taped up. To time and date stamp the photographs, I can see you had included a newspaper, which was dated 24 January 2017.

When we invite an appellant to provide us with comments on the operator’s case file, it is not an opportunity to provide any further evidence or raise new grounds for appeal. As such, the assessor advised this in her rationale. However, having looked at the evidence you included, we are satisfied that you were not attempting to raise any new grounds for appeal and that the evidence you included was expanding on your original grounds for appeal.

In particular, we felt that you were simply commenting on the signage provided by the operator and your photographs of the signs demonstrated your comments in a way that words could not.

While it cannot be determined who placed the tape on the signs, both John and I were in agreement that by covering the section which advised motorists that parking restrictions were in place on Saturdays between 9am and 12pm, you were not given sufficient opportunity to review this particular condition. Therefore, you were unaware of the conditions of the parking contract you had entered into.

After considering all of the above, we agreed that the appeal should have been allowed. As we felt that a procedural error had occurred by not considering the photographs you included in your comments on the operator’s case file, we decided to change your decision.

Yesterday, I advised both yourself and Parking Eye that a procedural error had occurred and that as a result, we would review the decision made. This morning, I re-assessed your appeal myself and re-sent your decision through.

I appreciate that this may not be viewable to yourself on the portal, as it can be temperamental, so I have arranged for a paper copy of the decision to be posted to you. Please allow two to three working days for this to arrive.

If you have any queries or concerns in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us on 0330 159 6126. Our office is open Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm. You may ask to speak directly with myself.

Fruitcake

I would put everything in writing as well as ringing them. Always create a paper trail when possible.

Did you contact the press? They might be interested in the eventual result and all the problems and incompetence this has highlighted.

fisherjim

I would also send a letter to the BPA highlighting once again that their cut price POPLA scheme is not fit for purpose.

Edna_Basher

Coupon-mad wrote: »

.... what the Hell is the matter with whoever signed that contract, could they not read the NHS Govt Policy on NHS car parks?

The contract was signed by the Montpelier Surgery Practice Business Manager, the aforementioned Mr. NH - for and on behalf of NHS Property Services Ltd.

I wonder if the bigwigs at NHS Property Services Ltd are even aware that he has entered their company into this contract with ParkingEye.

Coupon-mad

Wow this one should be exposed in the press. You have proved to POPLA that the signs WERE taped up both before and after the PCN was issued so, it seems, you have ParkingEye over a barrell.

This one could make a very good case to complain to the ICO about PE getting your DVLA data (and ALL patients data at this location where the event was on a Saturday) without reasonable cause, contrary to the KADOE contract. And surely this evidence is indicative of misleading photos (if PE's pics are dated, how can that be the right date - this smacks of the UKPC photo doctoring scandal).

Needs a further report to the DVLA and BPA and not taking no for an answer. Surely this shows a significant breach of the BPA CoP and sanctions MUST be applied. Or are PE saying *someone* taped up the signs in October, then removed the tape when the car was parked, then put the exact same tape over the exact same term, again in December or whenever? Laughable and desperate for PE.

Go get em, I say. Go for the jugular. Publicity, like UKPC had:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html

Then a DPA breach claim, they had no reasonable cause to get your data at all AND this was misleading and unfair business practice (at least) and harassment. Conduct that can lead to quite a claim for compensation for you.

It also suggests to me that every Saturday victim needs refunding.