POPLA appeal rejected!! What should I do next?

KeithP

JodyGray, why did you choose this particular thread to post on?

JodyGray

I'm new to this site and this kind of activity, I searched 'popla appeal rejected' and this came up. Apologies to Keith if my remarks were a bit harsh just not sure of any substance to his post. I don't wish to upset the regulars or 'trolls' just interested in similar accounts people may of had with these sharks and advice. I've learned to be better prepared in future - thanks to all the helpful positive feedback. Would be interesting to see what percentage of appeals through popla prevail, I would bet the 'members' make a substantial further profit.

The_Deep

OP, now take your revenge.

They have wasted your time, now waste theirs.

Send them a letter before action, there are plenty of examples on the internet, and you do not have to follow through if you do not want to. The very fact that you have sent one means that they have to devote resources to dealing with it.

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.

Coupon-mad

JodyGray wrote: »

I'm new to this site and this kind of activity, I searched 'popla appeal rejected' and this came up. Apologies to Keith if my remarks were a bit harsh just not sure of any substance to his post. I don't wish to upset the regulars or 'trolls' just interested in similar accounts people may of had with these sharks and advice.

I've learned to be better prepared in future - thanks to all the helpful positive feedback. Would be interesting to see what percentage of appeals through popla prevail, I would bet the 'members' make a substantial further profit.

Search POPLA lost.

Do not pay a PPC.

JodyGray

"do not pay a ppc"?

I have a young family and like many people struggle to make ends meet. The CAB advised me to contact the holiday Inn where the alleged offence took place. When searching for this I came across many unhappy people who have been treated badly by 'parking eye'.
Not paying means going to court and I have lost enough sleep and money to these scumbags......

Umkomaas

Not paying means going to court

Wholly misleading. Not paying does not mean 'going to court'.

It just means the door is open for a PPC to issue proceedings. The vast majority do not! And the PPC about which this thread relates have only ever appeared in the county court 7 times in the past 3 years (and those are all court cases, not necessarily parking cases).

Over 5 million private parking tickets are issued each year. Anecdotal evidence suggests that 60% of tickets aren't paid. Do the math! 3 million court cases a year? :rotfl:

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind they will be out of business by Christmas.

JodyGray

I emailed holiday Inn and they're cancelling the ticket!! Also they showed compassion towards the incident. I wish I had of done that first! Goes to show quality landowners are a world apart from the parking fine pirates.

Coupon-mad

JodyGray wrote: »

I emailed holiday Inn and they're cancelling the ticket!! Also they showed compassion towards the incident. I wish I had of done that first! Goes to show quality landowners are a world apart from the parking fine pirates.

Hooray, now do you understand why the NEWBIES thread says to do the complaint first, every time, and why I said NOT to pay a PPC?!

You would not have been likely to have been sued by TPS, but by coming here you have saved yourself being mugged, because you were about to pay them and we stopped you.

:T

Mackam88

Appologies in advance - i am unable to post new thread for some reason after recently registering here
I challenged a Metrolink PCN through Care Parking after reading all of the newbies threads etc. Appealed to POPLA on grounds of a ticket was purchased on the day in question. POPLA have rejected this saying there was no evidence submitted apart from the photograph of my tram ticket. A PDF document of my appeal was uploaded with my ticket due to the portal having a number restriction on words!

In the rejection email POPLA have stated as there was no evidence submitted from me there was no defence, therefore the ticket issued under 'abused patron parking' stands.

Also the case handler stated they had based the decision on the operatives evidence and as the operator had 'witnessed' the driver leave the tram carpark (without any photograpic evidence) might i add - that it must be correct due to lack of defense evidence my end!!
Surely this can not be used as it is hearsay and not concrete fact?

Please can anyone provide why i go from here?