NTK Received but Paid via Phone

TheDirector

As stated above, its not clear that that the private company has not adhered to the processes required. The appeal has now been rejected and a Popla code provided. It states that ' all vehicles must clearly
display a valid Pay & Display ticket or have a valid RingGo session when using the facility. Unfortunately, your vehicle was not clearly displaying a valid ticket or did not have a valid RingGo session when this Charge was issued.' It also references a supposed landmark case that went to the supreme court on the 4th November 2015.

It also says that only that only the driver can appeal to POPLA - "Please note that where a charge has been issued in Scotland or Northern Ireland, only the driver may appeal to POPLA.' However, that does not apply as keeper is based in England.

Any suggestions on what to do now. As stated, timescales have been met, photos were provided in the NTK and the keeper has not mentioned the fact that the wrong reg was picked up by RinGo.

Thanks in advance.

TheDirector

Can anyone possibly advise?

Quentin

Popla appeals are covered in depth in the newbies FAQ thread near the top of the forum

See post #3 there

There are links to near template appeals to crib from

Construct your appeal and post it here for comments before sending it

TheDirector

OK so I have read post #3 and I do not know what template the keeper should use. Having read the post a number of things do not apply; this is not about grace periods or signage or wording of the NTK (all seem fine)..I truly do not know what the basis of the argument should be. Obviously this is tricky as payment was made but reg was wrong on Ringo and advice was not to mention this. So it looks as though the driver simply parked for hours in what is clearly a charging car park, without paying.

Tried searching the forum re. the company name and popla, but could not find anything relevant to the situation. Does anyone have a basic popla template that can be used?

[Deleted User]

Ok then ask yourself this:

1. Have you paid?
2. Can you prove you've paid?
3. Does C accept you've paid?

So in principle there is no breach of contract and attempted compliance with all terms.

4. Is it proportionate to seek £160 plus from you for a technical breach where no loss has been incurred at all (not even an overstay)

That is technically a breach of a term, but not one that should result in a contractual penalty being applied (and make no mistake this is a penalty).

These cases can and have been won, esp where an "oh" was used instead of a "zero".

The fact is the PPC can easily manually check this prior to commencement of the claim. A £10 admin fee for them to do some checking might be reasonable, but not a 3 figure sum.

TheDirector

Johnersh wrote: »

Ok then ask yourself this:

1. Have you paid?
2. Can you prove you've paid?
3. Does C accept you've paid?

So in principle there is no breach of contract and attempted compliance with all terms.

4. Is it proportionate to seek £160 plus from you for a technical breach where no loss has been incurred at all (not even an overstay)

That is technically a breach of a term, but not one that should result in a contractual penalty being applied (and make no mistake this is a penalty).

These cases can and have been won, esp where an "oh" was used instead of a "zero".

The fact is the PPC can easily manually check this prior to commencement of the claim. A £10 admin fee for them to do some checking might be reasonable, but not a 3 figure sum.

OK thank you, but this is my point. the advice on here was not to tell them that payment had been made, not to go into all the stuff about ringo getting the digit wrong, and of course not to indicate who the driver was. So the appeal did not say any of that. So should the keeper now mention all this to POPLA; maybe they would understand and surely then the argument about disproportionate charges becomes more applicable - given that money has been paid.

Also, im surprised nothing gets mentioned on here about the fact that in these situations RIngo gets to keep the money presumably. That cant be right. I presume the private company don't get paid because it did not match a reg, so they are out of pocket, but what happens to the money was actually paid! Ringo website basically says they wont go into any discussions about situations relating to pcns and that it is responsibility of the driver to make sure reg is correct and that u should sit in the car where its quiet. How do they know know if it will be quiet enough in the car or if you have a decent signal to be able to clearly hear the reg back.

[Deleted User]

Not interested in appeals, just defences.

Ringo won't keep the dolls, so it's the PPC who've been paid and now want paying again (which is actually worse)...

TheDirector

Well as per above, it seems that the popla appeal (or defence if you prefer), should actually now provide an explanation of the fact that payment was made, that a digit was wrong, etc. Maybe this should have been done in the first appeal to the PPC. And yes, looks like on this occasion, driver should be identified.

[Deleted User]

Sorry, I should've been clearer. I can't really help with POPLA, never done one.

So once that appeal's completed and if it's not put to bed, it's all about defending the subsequent litigation - hence pointers to consider for the defence.

In many cases, the PPC try and bring claims flakier than puff pastry and disregarding the statutory notices. There, it's important not to give up evidence (the identity of the driver) which could improve their gand.

However, in other cases it makes sense to identify the driver as it makes it much easier to draft documents and witness statements (and, in your case, show they've had the money, so WTH with a court claim?) As a practical point, at court it can be very tricky not to say "I" if you were, in fact, driving.

You've got to decide your best defence.

Redx

as above its either

A) a popla appeal based on POFA from the keeper , where the driver has not been identified, meaning there is less weight about what happened and more about no keeper liability due to POFA etc

OR

its a popla appeal from an admitted driver where its about the issues on the day as a first person witness, not about HIDING BEHIND POFA

if a PPC has adhered to POFA (like PE tend to do) , then a POFA led appeal may be futile and detract from the true nature of the events and circumstances , hence why a driver appeal may be better

you as the defendant must decide upon theb bst strategy, so checking for POFA compliance or not may be what decides you for appeal A or appeal B and the NEWBIES thread emphasises this in strong terms

so not much different to what a legal defence would be, as in what Johnnersh is telling you


for England and Wales , a popla appeal can come from a keeper , a driver , a hirer , a lessee