Gemini Parking Solutions - Help with appeal

Coupon-mad

Yes and yes, use that email address. Your case exposes a serious training need for young 'JL'.

pathris

Hello All,
I received the response from POPLA and my appeal has been successful :-)
Thank you to everyone who took the time to comment and advise, especially to Coupon-mad - Thank you.
Please see below and I hope is useful for someone else.

Assessor supporting rational for decision
....Upon review of the evidence, I am not satisfied that the driver has been identified sufficiently. In order to transfer liability from the driver, to the registered keeper of the vehicle, the strict provisions laid out in PoFA 2012 must be adhered to: “The notice must be given by – (a) Handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or (b) Sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. (5) The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given”. Upon review of the evidence, a Notice to Driver was issued on 9 October, 2017. As the operator did not issue a Notice to Keeper it has not sufficiently transferred liability to the Keeper and the PCN has been issued incorrectly. I note the appellant has raised other grounds of appeal within their submission. However, as I have allowed for one reason given, I do not feel that the additional grounds require any further consideration. Accordingly, I must allow the appeal.

Coupon-mad

Yay, we got a POPLA appeal reviewed and changed! A first I think! Astonishing.

Umkomaas

As the operator did not issue a Notice to Keeper it has not sufficiently transferred liability to the Keeper and the PCN has been issued incorrectly.

Actually, POPLA, it has transferred absolutely no liability whatsoever!

As the operator did not issue a Notice to Keeper it has not sufficiently transferred liability to the Keeper and the PCN has been issued incorrectly.

How does that work? The PCN may well have been issued ‘correctly’, the fact that they didn't issue a NtK doesn’t mean the PCN was issued incorrectly.

POPLA seem to be in a mixed up mess!

Was there no explanation, or apology to you for originally screwing this up?

Well done on getting this sorted.

nosferatu1001

Its because POPLA has this bind that they seem to only "consider" whether a PCN was issued "correctly", but then MUST overturn tickets which *may* have been issued correctly for which the NtK is either missing or deficient.

I mentioend this on another group, as its backards. They need to consider whether the *pesona appealing* has *any liability in law*, which is a different question.