PCN CP Plus Limited - POPLA Appeal rejected

The_Deep

Mandyminx08 wrote: »

I don't want to set myself up for failure and my worry is that the Court will rule in favour of the Claimant based on the appeal decision of POPLA and I would rather avoid having to pay another £75 on top.

Most judges are aware that PoPLA is not independent, it is paid for by the parking companies.

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]It is not a fine, it is an invoice from an ex- clamper for damages for the harm they allege they suffered when you did what you did. We call it a scam. Pay them not one penny unless a judge so orders it.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP after the election, it can cause the scammer extra costs and work.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.[/FONT]

Mandyminx08

Yea I understand. I felt so confident with my appeal when I submitted it to POPLA because to me I know I've paid but according to POPLA CP have all this evidence of signage (which isn't even a dispute of mine) and the logs and I have nothing. Now I just feel deflated and as though it's just a lost cause.

Redx

I believe a judge would see it your way , judges are independent , popla are not

You paid , no bilking , the scammer should see that and cancel , I believe a judge would accept the events

A bank would penalise you for £100 for putting your pin in incorrectly , or your password when logging in. I do not agree that consumers should be punished for small mistakes , they make us act as unpaid wardens or ticket sellers , if they don't like it , pay for a parking attendant , same with railway tickets , pay for someone to dispense them , don't punish the inexperienced and untrained public

I have self service in supermarkets and petrol stations for the same reason , I am not their unpaid gopher to be shipped every time I make a simple mistake , or their machines do

fisherjim

Local authorities are forbidden from using ANPR for car parking, in fact my local council was forced to abandon this system in a number of car parks where they had installed it through a PPC, it cost them thousands.


The reason being that it cannot be trusted, I have even witnessed time clocks being out by at least four minutes in a privately run car park, and we had a case on here where one device was one hour out after the clocks were altered due to daylight saving ending.


What you do is up to you but these PPC's are all shall we say on the dodgy side, their only purpose is money making and they use every trick to do just that.



The theory is that they read your appeal and act on facts or mitigation and make a fair judgment they rarely do that it doesn't make money.


POPLA is only there to judge on technical, or procedural arguments not on what happened or if the PPC has made a fair decision, your mistake was to restate the same appeal to them.


The BPA is a members club paid for by the PPC, POPLA is paid for by the BPA, until there is proper regulation of this sorry industry this is how it is.


The only truly independent decisions are through the courts, but that is still a risk and you need all your ducks in a row.


I would suggest that you need a wider time span from the PPC's records as a start at least one hour each side of the entry time.

waamo

CP Plus haven't done court so far. Even for repeat "offenders" who would be an easy win against.

I sincerely doubt they would change their arm with a tricky one like this as a first foray into court.

Have you asked Asda to cancel it?

Coupon-mad

Have you emailed the DPO back yet? Send to the email address that sent you that log.

This is so simple to expose by asking for the 2 things I told you to ask for in post #5.

I didn't tell you to call it a SAR as you have already done that, it's a follow up email and should have gone back to them today. Yet you are going round in circles it seems.

Mandyminx08

I think we may have our wires crossed Coupon-mad, the documents were received as their response to my POPLA appeal not as a result of a formal request I had made.
I asked for the CCTV as part of my appeal and this wasn't provided.
I haven't made any SAR request at all and am not 'going round in circles' as you seem to suggest.
Just to clarify the information listed in #4 was provided in response to my POPLA appeal to suppory their assertion that the fine should be paid and not by their data protection officer (I haven't made any formal request to them at all).

Umkomaas

I asked for the CCTV as part of my appeal and this wasn't provided.

They are using ANPR cameras, not CCTV. But if they had CCTV, would it be trained on the pay machine and would it be sufficiently focused on the pay slot and screen to be able to show the event in sharp enough relief?

How would they know it was you, because they could not release any general footage showing a slew of people using the machine for you to pick yourself out? Breach of GDPR AIUI.

You're chasing shadows seeking CCTV footage.

Coupon-mad

Mandyminx08 wrote: »

I think we may have our wires crossed Coupon-mad, the documents were received as their response to my POPLA appeal not as a result of a formal request I had made.
I asked for the CCTV as part of my appeal and this wasn't provided.
I haven't made any SAR request at all and am not 'going round in circles' as you seem to suggest.
Just to clarify the information listed in #4 was provided in response to my POPLA appeal to suppory their assertion that the fine should be paid and not by their data protection officer (I haven't made any formal request to them at all).

OK, so I am telling you to do that SAR now then (immediately by email), not mentioning that they've supplied it before, at POPLA stage.

And clearly ask for the machine logs from ALL machines on site.

This goes by email to their DPO using the email in the PPC's privacy page.

What you are hoping for is to expose an altered version, or that suddenly they cough up two machine logs...when they only showed one to POPLA.

That is why you want to ask for it, but without tipping them off.