Help with my POPLA appeal draft against Smart

KeithP

melissalilyxox wrote: »

this was my reply https://ibb.co/dxxxxR

That image shows both your stepfather's name and the claim number together with the car reg. no.

I suggest you delete that pic until those details can be obliterated.

Fruitcake

melissalilyxox wrote: »

No did not make them aware of the drivers identity however did tell them about blue badge age etc

You should delete that link as it has a name and PCN number in it. Things like that should never appear on a public forum.

It's good that you didn't name the driver, so, if the NTK was non POFA compliant then that will win at PoPLA. You will however have to spell it out to the PoPLA assessor where it fails to meet the very strict requirements of the POFA. I think you may have done this in your first post on this thread, but I haven't looked in detail yet as I am pushed for time right now.

The regulars will look at it when thy get the chance, so don't send it yet if you are not near the PoPLA deadline yet.

melissalilyxox

melissalilyxox wrote: »

No did not make them aware of the drivers identity however did tell them about blue badge age etc

this was my reply https://ibb.co

Fruitcake wrote: »

You should delete that link as it has a name and PCN number in it. Things like that should never appear on a public forum.

It's good that you didn't name the driver, so, if the NTK was non POFA compliant then that will win at PoPLA. You will however have to spell it out to the PoPLA assessor where it fails to meet the very strict requirements of the POFA. I think you may have done this in your first post on this thread, but I haven't looked in detail yet as I am pushed for time right now.

The regulars will look at it when thy get the chance, so don't send it yet if you are not near the PoPLA deadline yet.

Thankyou, didnt realise will delete now.
I appriciate youve taken the time to give me some advice
So do you think i stand a strong chance up to yet for winning the appeal with POPLA, if i tweek and add a few more points, eapecially towards the poor signage and notice was NON POFA compliant, as well as the initial rejection still persuing me as the keeper (they clearly can see i havent named the driver)??
Your correct, not near the Popla deadline yet, initially i was going to pay up the £60 tomorrow or send the appeal, but after reading this, im considering i have a strong chance?
Do you :rotfl:

Thanks fruitcake

Fruitcake

MSE has a very good success rate at both PoPLA and in court, as long as posters follow the advice.

Not so Smart are not called Not so Smart for no reason.

If you can put up good points at PoPLA you will win. In any case, the PoPLA decision is not binding on the motorists.

Castle

melissalilyxox wrote: »

Driver proceeded to pay for parking, and was oblivious that the new pound coins that were introduced were no longer accepted in the machine. Here, the driver spent almost 10 minutes entering the reg, and putting pound coins in it for it to reject again and again. Realising it could be the old pounds, driver proceeded back to the car where driver made passenger aware who was waiting in the car that he was doing so and to inform any wardens that he would be back soon.

I'm confused; are you saying the machine would only take old pound coins?

Coupon-mad

The keeper has 100% chance of winning at POPLA v Smart, as long as you are sure the driver was neither implied in the first appeal, nor was any drop-down choice of 'driver' chosen.

melissalilyxox

Castle wrote: »

I'm confused; are you saying the machine would only take old pound coins?

thankyou, typo my mistake!!! Would have probably sent that off not realising!
Appriciate that thanks x

melissalilyxox

Castle wrote: »

I'm confused; are you saying the machine would only take old pound coins?

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The keeper has 100% chance of winning at POPLA v Smart, as long as you are sure the driver was neither implied in the first appeal, nor was any drop-down choice of 'driver' chosen.

thankyou coupon mad - ive been hoping to recieve a reply from you after reading all your advice to others! as well as your popularity on here so its given me a huge boost of confidence and will send off appeal in the next few days

driver was never named no - i suggested hints as in blue driver, age, using wording as 'he' 'his' but he was never named as the driver :T
Can you confirm all the main points ive used in the draft are looking okay?

Coupon-mad

Make sure the POPLA appeal is done in the name of the person who got the POPLA code, not 'on their behalf' in your name. Just appeal online as him.

Remove these completely; they do not win:

5. The ANPR system is neither reliable nor accurate, Time on site is not parking time

6. Unreasonable and unfair terms

And this below sentence is crossed out because it is not true. Smart do NOT even for one minute try to hold a keeper liable; that's why you 100% win!

(2) Keeper Liability

[STRIKE]Smart Parking want to make use of the Keeper Liability provisions in Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 and Smart Parking have not issued and delivered a parking charge notice to the driver in the place where the parking event took place[/STRIKE], Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Failure to comply with paragraph 6 means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver.

If this was a postal PCN from Smart, add that they have not included the warning about keeper liability, set out as mandatory wording, in para 9(2)f of Schedule 4.


Remove the bit I crossed out here, which is worded from a company:

In order to be able to claim unpaid parking charges from a vehicle’s keeper, an operator must deliver a Notice to Keeper in full compliance with Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (“POFA”). There are many reasons why Smart’s PCN does not comply with POFA and consequently, Smart has forfeited its right to utilise the provisions of POFA to claim unpaid parking charges [STRIKE]from [ABC]. In order for you to understand why, we suggest that you carefully study the details of Schedule 4, Paragraph 9 in particular.[/STRIKE]

This needs to be a numbered point on its own:

The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge

melissalilyxox

I won my appeal - thankyou so much everyone!! Wouldnt have been able to without your advice