Request for charge cancellation or POPLA code didn't work

Fruitcake

vodevil wrote: »

There was no windscreen PCN. OPS contacted the registered keeper directly. This was through a car hiring platform called Hyiacar, where people rent their personal (or not) car directly to other people. The car owner contacted me as soon as he received communication from OPS and sent them the rental agreement, where it states that I was hiring the car for that period. I have contacted the owner again, to let them know about the situation and he said that OPS went back to him saying that I was denying being the driver (which I didn't do - didn't deny or confirm that).

Good, the keeper is out of the equation having named you as hirer and supplied the scammers with a copy of the rental agreement. He is one savvy chap and could teach a few of the major hire car companies a thing or three about procedures.
He should also complain to the BPA, DVLA, and his MP because he has met the strict requirements of the PoFA yet the scammers are trying to make him liable again.

Put all the above in your complaints. Ideally get the keeper's comments in writing.

nosferatu1001

Put in your complaint that the Operaotr is also lying to the lease company.
They have stated you have denied being the driver, when no admission was made. They are not permitted to "revert" to the lessor, as POFA gives them no such mechanism, and htey certainly cannot lie.

You require the BPA tells you of the sanctions that will be imposed due to this attempt at Fraud under Section 2 of the fraud act 2006.

vodevil

Latest developments: a few days after I posted a letter to OPS, they sent an email to the car owner saying "We have taken the decision to cancel the parking charge.". They did not respond to my letter yet.

Anyway, on my complaint to the BPA I included the entire situation, including the latest developments.

vodevil

Just got this reply from BPA:

Please be advised PoFA is used to make the keeper liable where the driver is unknown; after reviewing your appeal I note you advised “There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You

must either offer me a POPLA code or cancel the charge.”



As the status of the driver was unknown, One Park Solutions were not in breach by reverting the charge back to the keeper and as such, there has not been a breach of our Code.



Due to the charge being reverted back to the keeper, no POPLA code was provided to you as the keeper was liable for this charge due to you not accepting liability as the driver.



As we have been unable to determine a breach of our Code, we will be unable to assist you further with this matter.

Umkomaas

That's utter BS from the BPA. :doh: Someone there should be put on the same training course as some POPLA assessors should.

But I see your charge has been cancelled? PPCs often do when they find the BPA sniffing around, so job done. But the BPA is still wrong in their reply to you.

Coupon-mad

Forward it to Steve Clark:

steve.c@britishparking.co.uk

...and tell him (with a link to this thread) that the MSE forum posters are interested to know when the law changed with an amendment to Schedule 4 that means that when liability has properly passed to the hirer/lessee, that somehow a parking firm can later revert to the registered keeper again and harass them for money by lying that the hirer/lessee's appeal has denied being the driver (which it did not - but even if it had, no 'reverting to the rk' is allowed in law once liability has passed).

A hirer/lessee has a right and status that allows them to appeal WITHOUT saying who was driving and at NO POINT can a scum parking firm revert to the hirer company.

For the BPA to say they can is astonishingly biased and wrong, and just confirms to people like me, that the 'race to the bottom' where the IPC are undoubtedly in the lead, is actually a closer run thing than I thought.

Castle

Memo to the BPA:-

The hire company is not the keeper.