PLEASE HELP - POPLA appeal rejected - Minster Baywatch

Azure6

Thank you - that's cleared that up for me.
Forgive me if i sound foolish ( I am a total novice to all this):

1) As the Beavis case is being referenced to so much should POPLA (maybe they do) not have records of which PPC matches the Beavis case details - e.g signage similar criteria and income situation similar?
Only because I know a kind person has posted about the income being different for Minster Baywatch and Beavis - and i thought would it not be fair/right for POPLA to have this information to assess against? (I have no idea if they do)

2) Second - if I've lost at POPLA what gives me any chance at winning in small claims court?

3) Thirdly - these debt collector letters I should be expecting - will the £100 fine be honoured or will they add other charges to that - which i would have to pay if SCC lost?

Thank you kindly in advance
Im ever so grateful for all your help - Im out my depth here:(

Quentin

Debt collector letters should just be ignored. Irrespective of how much they ask for!

See all the successful wins reported here from Court hearings

(A Court hearing doesn't necessarily follow a popla appeal!)

Umkomaas

1. No idea. It doesn't change anything in your case. Nothing totally predictable with POPLA.

2. Well, they might not issue court proceedings. If they do, a strong defence will assist. Litigation is always risky - for both sides.

3. It's not a 'fine'! Debt collectors always add their (no collection, no fee) £60 to the £100 original charge. But no one in their right mind would pay a debt crawler. If it went to court and you lost, the cost (everything included) would amount to little more than ~£175.

Don't feel out of your depth, you will quickly get the hang of this, especially if you don't restrict yourself to just your own thread. Read around some of the others each day on the forum. All adds to your knowledge and understanding - and confidence.

Azure6

Thank you so much everyone!!

Coupon-mad

should POPLA (maybe they do) not have records of which PPC matches the Beavis case details - e.g signage similar criteria and income situation similar?

Don't be daft. No cases are like the Beavis case and the income made no difference.

Azure6

If no case is like the Beavis case then how are POPLA able to reference the Beavis case in appeal rejections?
Thank you

beamerguy

Azure6 wrote: »

If no case is like the Beavis case then how are POPLA able to reference the Beavis case in appeal rejections?
Thank you

In a nutshell, nowadays POPLA don't have a clue
what they are doing.

POPLA clearly don't understand the difference between
the Beavis case and all the others.
POPLA also cannot understand the problems with ANPR

All in all, a useless bunch, they are just a bi product of
the BPA in disgrace

If motorists are to deal with morons, at least make
sure the morons are intelligent

nosferatu1001

Azure6 wrote: »

If no case is like the Beavis case then how are POPLA able to reference the Beavis case in appeal rejections?
Thank you

Because theyve been told to do so. Theyre no longer legally trained, and seem barely trained.

Coupon-mad

Yep, because they were spoon fed some words by the BPA.

If an appellant dares to mention 'no loss' even in the completely different context of a pay & display car park, POPLA come crashing in with a 'Beavis case kills your argument' trashy template.

Azure6

Hello everyone,

Just to update I have received a county court letter from Minster Baywatch dated 07 Nov 18.
I have been onto MCOL and submitted an Acknowledgement of Service to earn myself 14 more days.
I will look for Mecca Bingo, Oldham similar defence posts and adapt and then post here for your kind thoughts.
Is there anything else I should be doing at this stage?
P.S - Will i physically have to go to court and verbally defend myself?
Kind thanks