Car Hire popla

Dane19

I have edited and submitted the rebuttal, thank you all for the help and advise, much appreciated wether won or lost.

Surely i will let you know the outcome.

Scoobylou9

Good luck.

I’m in exactly the same position so I’d really appreciate if you could somehow paste a link or copy and paste your POPLA appeal onto this thread.

My situation is the same as yours, as in my car is leased too so I think for us the process is that much tougher!

I hope your ticket gets cancelled as it would give me some hope too but having read others experiences it seems losses are much more common now owing to the fact that some assessors are weak/not as clued up and so refuse the appeal.

Do keep us updated.

MistyZ

Scoobylou9 wrote: »

My situation is the same as yours, as in my car is leased too so I think for us the process is that much tougher!

Scoobylou9, start your own thread if you need more help.

But don't go thinking that hire car appeals are tougher than other types .... Usually they're quite straightforward because the PPCs rarely comply with POFA re. sending hire docs to hirer and are unable to supply evidence of having done so to POPLA.

Dane19's case is a little unusual. I'd recommend reading other hire car threads too, as well as the hire car section in the Newbies' thread.

Coupon-mad

Dane19 wrote: »

This letter from the lease company

That letter is merely a letter transferring liability and is not the 'hire documents' and 'copy of the original NTK' that needed to be included with any NTH.

Dane19

Dane19 wrote: »

I have edited and submitted the rebuttal, thank you all for the help and advise, much appreciated wether won or lost.

Surely i will let you know the outcome.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That letter is merely a letter transferring liability and is not the 'hire documents' and 'copy of the original NTK' that needed to be included with any NTH.

Yes I understand. The issue is P.E did not include these with the orignal NTH but they have included all iin the evidence pack . So it's my word against there's I think.

Coupon-mad

It would be shocking if P/Eye win at POPLA by lying about the NTH enclosures.

Dane19

Hi All

After so much waiting I lost. Here is the beginning of popla letter

After reviewing the evidence provided by both parties, I am not satisfied that, the appellant has been identified as the driver of the vehicle 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 PoFA 2012 must be adhered to. The operator has provided a copy of the notice to hirer and hire documents after reviewing this I am satisfied that; the operator has met with the requirements of PoFA 2012

KeithP

So PoPLA don't even know what a registered keeper is?

How on earth did they decide that the appellant was the registered keeper?

Castle

KeithP wrote: »

So PoPLA don't even know what a registered keeper is?

How on earth did they decide that the appellant was the registered keeper?

Exactly; it's the one thing that was impossible for the appellant to be.

Edna_Basher

POPLA's assessor roulette strikes again - as we have already experienced.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=75530465&postcount=3434

Many of the current crop of POPLA assessors appear to be capable only of creating a collage of cut-and-pasted template sentences - without having the faintest idea what they have written.

In their "rational", what did the assessor have to say in response to your comment that the landowner's witness statement was signed 6 years ago and could not be relied upon?