BPA Notice to Driver template response query

Kayaker

The template response to a windscreen notice issued by a BPA member states "You are required to respond within 21 days. "

What is the basis of this 21 day period? I note that the BPA Code of Practice states that "You must acknowledge or reply to the appeal within 14 days of receiving it" so why 21 days?

Many thanks

KeithP

The twenty-one days you mention is in the paragraph about a Section 10 Notice under the DPA.

It is that response that is required in 21 days - as specified in Section 10 of The Data Protection Act.

Umkomaas

The template response to a windscreen notice issued by a BPA member states "You are required to respond within 21 days. "

That’s in relation to a Section 10 notice under the DPA and the processing of the appellant’s personal data, not the NtD per se.

What is the basis of this 21 day period? I note that the BPA Code of Practice states that "You must acknowledge or reply to the appeal within 14 days of receiving it" so why 21 days?

The CoP entry relates to acknowledging receipt of the initial appeal about the parking charge from the driver or keeper. There is an overall 35 day’s provided to the PPC to make a decision on the initial appeal.

Nobody really gets too exercised about the PPC not complying with the 14 days target.

Kayaker

Thank you both for your replies. Another question please: I note that the template response for a BPA windscreen PCN is quite short with the apparent goal being to get a POPLA code whereas at POPLA the goal seems to be to go to town with long winded points in the hope they will give up. Why not give lengthy fully reasoned arguments in the first place?

Quentin

Because the ppc rejects appeals as a matter of course whereas POPLA doesn't!

KeithP

Because most PPCs won't even bother to read it before rejecting it.

There's no profit to be made in accepting appeals.

Why put a lot of effort in compiling a lengthy appeal that might not even be read?

Coupon-mad

Because this tactic works!

bergkamp

Kayaker wrote: »

Thank you both for your replies. Another question please: I note that the template response for a BPA windscreen PCN is quite short with the apparent goal being to get a POPLA code whereas at POPLA the goal seems to be to go to town with long winded points in the hope they will give up. Why not give lengthy fully reasoned arguments in the first place?

The goal is to get a rejection and POPLA code without an NTK being received.

The appeal to the NTD is by the RK.

The driver on the date of event is not named.

There can then be no keeper liability under Schedule 4 of

POFA 2012, which alone will win at POPLA.