Metrolink Careparking Fine

Daver

….what happened, did you get this cancelled at Popla?

Umkomaas

Daver wrote: »

….what happened, did you get this cancelled at Popla?

Too early I would suggest.

The PPC has 21 days to respond to the POPLA appeal and the appellant a further 7 days to rebut the PPCs comments.

It's not far away, but probably not there yet.

Tentatively

Hi all,


The appeal was successful and the charge cancelled. Many, many thanks to Coupon-mad, Fruitcake, The Deep and Redx.


Not sure if any of you have seen this on the POPLA site?

There has been a delay in POPLA considering appeals against parking tickets issued on land subject to Byelaw. This was due to relevant stakeholders clarifying with government whether Notices issued under Railway Byelaws could be heard by POPLA.
POPLA has now received confirmation from the Department for Transport that it considers issuing penalties on Byelaws land a legitimate practice. It has also confirmed that as a matter of good practice – parking operators should offer an independent appeal against such penalties.
Due to the lack of progress on government guidance the British Parking Association (BPA) took the decision to remove the requirement for parking operators to signpost motorists to POPLA for penalty charges issued under byelaws from 18 September 2017. The BPA has now instructed its operators to signpost motorists to independent appeal for all penalties issued on Byelaws land after 1 November 2018.
There are a considerable number of adjourned appeals within the POPLA system. It was thought that we would hear these appeals once we received clarification from the government. However, the parking operators in question have taken the decision to not contest these appeals. This does not mean the notices were issued incorrectly – the parking operators have made this decision due to the significant delay. All motorists with appeals adjourned for this reason will have the penalties cancelled and will receive notification in due course.

Assessor supporting rationale for decision



The operator’s case is that it issued a PCN because the driver was unauthorised to park in the reserved bay. The operator has provided photographic evidence of the appellant’s vehicle, registration number, XXXXXXX, parked at the site on 5 July 2018 at 14:23. After reviewing the evidence provided by both parties, I am not satisfied that the appellant has been identified as the driver of the vehicle in question at the time of the relevant parking event. The operator is therefore pursuing the appellant as the Registered Keeper of the vehicle in this instance. For the operator to transfer liability for unpaid parking charges from the driver of the vehicle, to the registered keeper of the vehicle, the regulations laid out in the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 must be adhered to. The PCN that was issued was a Notice to Driver followed by a Notice to Keeper. The Notice to Driver was issued on 5 July 2018. The Notice to Keeper sent via post on 17 September 2018 to Mr Tentatively. An appeal was submitted on 30 July 2018 from Mr Tentatively. Within the appeal they have stated, “There will be no admissions as to who was driving.” Therefore the appellant has not identified as the driver, or named the driver. The operator has then sent the notice of rejection to the registered keeper of the vehicle; therefore, it would appear that the operator is holding the registered keeper liable. The operator has advised within the evidence pack that it is using PoFA 2012 to hold the keeper liable. As the operator has issued a Notice to Driver and a Notice to Keeper the operator will need to comply with section 7 and 7 of PoFA 2012. Upon reviewing the Notice to Driver, I am satisfied that it complies with section 7 of PoFA 2012. Upon reviewing the Notice to Keeper, I am not satisfied that this complies with section 8 of PoFA 2012. Section 7 (4) (b) states, “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.” Furthermore, Section 7 (5) states, “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.” Based on this, the Notice to Keeper needed to have reached the appellant by 30 August 2018 as the Notice to Driver was issued on 5 July 2018. For this to happen the Notice to Keeper needed to have been sent by no later than 28 August 2018 taking into account Section 7 (6) of PoFA 2012. However, the Notice to Keeper was not sent until 17 September 2018, therefore is not presumed delivered until 19 September 2018, which is 20 days after it needed to have been delivered. As the Notice to Keeper has not been issued in line with PoFA 2012, then the operator is not able to transfer the liability onto the registered keeper and can only hold the driver liable for the PCN. As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is the driver and therefore liable for the charge. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.

Fruitcake

It would probably be better to delete the text about the new PCN and start a new thread as this is a completely separate. Just mention this thread in passing so the regulars know you are not a novice.
Please tell us the name of the PPC for the residential PCN. We would really like to know how a bunch of idiots can possibly think you have control over the weather.

Well done on your win. Please also post on the PoPLA Decisions thread, with a link to this one.

We have seen the info about the PoPLA/Byelaws decision. It provides more questions than answers. Thanks anyway. It is better to be told twice than not at all.

Tentatively

Done.


See here: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5925578/district-enforcement-chancers

Redx

well done

we told you to stick with us and beat them on a technicality, because they are NOT the sharpest tools in the box and they tend to fail with the NTK and POFA2012 failures

should be good preparation for your DE pcn and look forward to hearing how DE fail with that one at some point in the next 6 years

Daver

Well Done....that'll be another 2 tickets they will lose through their own stupidity, never even bothered to send an NTK to me....and admitted that to Popla!