PCN where permit not transferred to vehicle

Coupon-mad

But because POPLA won't have seen this before, that's why your comments MUST spell out how the PPC is in a corner.

Can't have a rookie POPLA Assessor missing the entire point.

Cornerhog82

Coupon-mad wrote: »

But because POPLA won't have seen this before, that's why your comments MUST spell out how the PPC is in a corner.

Can't have a rookie POPLA Assessor missing the entire point.

In that case once I've drafted I will post on here for feedback before sending to POPLA

Cornerhog82

Here we go...drafted evidence rebuttal

In the operator’s evidence documentation Section XX, paragraph XX they clearly state:

‘We are unsure why the appellant has appealed to POPLA on this grounds of appeal, when they are the registered keeper of the vehicle and submitted a Transfer of Liability (TOL) to the driver of the vehicle on the XX Aug 19, so are therefore no longer liable for the parking charge notice.’

Paragraph XX of Section X in their evidence confirms they have been provided with the name and address of the driver and they have also provided a copy of a readdressed Parking Charge Notice detailing the name and address of the driver (page XX within Section XX). I cannot therefore understand why the operator has not withdrawn from the POPLA process against the keeper of the vehicle, stating that the driver had been named and they were now being pursued. Having chosen not to withdraw the POPLA against the keeper, they must therefore abide by POPLA's decision. Once the driver has been named, as long as this is done before legal action commences the right to keeper liability cannot be upheld.

As POPLA does not have the power to uphold a case against a keeper who cannot be liable or to subsequently tell a parking firm they are now free to pursue the named driver, a third party, POPLA will have to find that the appellant is not liable and uphold the appeal. On this basis, POPLA should therefore tell the operator to cancel the parking charge. Whether this is fair on the operator or not is irrelevant, as they had the option to withdraw from this appeal and have not done so. By outlining that the Registered keeper is not liable, yet continuing the POPLA process against the keeper, the operator has very explicitly justified through its own admission why the Parking Charge Notice must now be cancelled.

Coupon-mad

Go for it. POPLA will scratch their heads and if they find against you they will be wrong in law and will need a complaint.

Cornerhog82

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Go for it. POPLA will scratch their heads and if they find against you they will be wrong in law and will need a complaint.

So that rebuttal alone and submit?

Coupon-mad

Yes that's what I would say, just that in the comments box, twist that knife.

nosferatu1001

Yep, just that

See what they do with this...

Cornerhog82

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes that's what I would say, just that in the comments box, twist that knife.

Submitted - lets wait and see.

Cornerhog82

Have received notification that one of the PCN appeals with POPLA has been successful - I understand this would normally be posted in the successful appeals, however it is slightly complicated.

RK has now received 2 emails from POPLA as below (that leaves one other awaiting any reply from POPLA)

It has come to our attention that you are not the named party that the operator is pursuing for payment of the Parking Charge Notice.



In order to review the appeal and issue the decision outcome to you, we require authorisation from the named party.



Please reply to this email with a signed letter of authority confirming your details, the details of the named party and including a statement to advise that they are happy for you to handle the appeal on their behalf.



We require the letter of authority, or evidence that you are an authorised party acting on behalf of a company, within the next 7 days. If we do not receive the information within this timeframe we shall withdraw your appeal.



This will leave the balance of the charge payable and should you wish to continue disputing the charge you may need to seek independent legal support.



Yours sincerely,


POPLA Team

Not quite sure why POPLA can uphold one appeal, but seek 3rd party authorisation on others???? Should RK comply with the request?

And it is this wording in the email from POPLA that concerns me '...the details of the named party and including a statement to advise that they are happy for you to handle the appeal on their behalf.'

The appeal is not on their behalf, as the appeal was in regards to the PCN against the RK!?!? Care Parking attempted to recover the charge from the named driver, without withdrawing from the initial POPLA process against the RK.

Should RK open a dialogue with POPLA and direct them to the successful decision?

Cornerhog82

Coupon-Mad, would you be able to advise on this if possible please?