POPLA appeal for MET Parking Services

Umkomaas

Imagine if the only infraction they on that day at that single location was one vehicle.

No need to show location. You are reading too much into this.

If you're not going to work with us fully, you tell us whether that NtK is fully compliant with PoFA, or not. If it is, forget all the MI5 stuff, the keeper is liable if the driver isn't going to be identified.   

nosferatu1001

As above
Your job is to then tell us if the NtK is POFA compliant. If it is then all your obfuscation is pointless, and a waste of everyones time. 

Coupon-mad

It is not about whether the grammar is correct!  We are asking if it's a POFA-worded one or not.  Someone only YESTERDAY posted a pic of a MET NTK that we looked at and I replied on, and that one was a POFA one (the wording on the front).   Why don't you read that thread? This is simple.

Everyone appeals to POPLA using the templates in the 3rd post of the NEWBIES thread.  No-one pays.

tallac

Hi. Thanks for the info, feel a little uncomfortable so I've redacted all the personal info as well as any numbers/barcodes etc.

KeithP

What is the Date of Issue of that NTK?

@Umkomaas did ask...

Umkomaas said:

@tallac - which PPC; is their NtK PoFA compliant? Upload it here (both sides) redacted of personal information, but leave all dates showing, if you can't work it out. 

Redx

so its MET

did the NTK arrive with the keeper within 14 days ? , so say 13 or less ? yes or no

tallac

Redx said:

so its MET

did the NTK arrive with the keeper within 14 days ? , so say 13 or less ? yes or no

Yes, less than 13 days.

Redx

tallac said:

Redx said:

so its MET

did the NTK arrive with the keeper within 14 days ? , so say 13 or less ? yes or no

Yes, less than 13 days.

then not revealing the driver is a moot point if the claimant complied with POFA

not naming the driver is only useful where a claimant has failed to comply with POFA

A DRIVER IS ALWAYS DEEMED LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF THE VEHICLE AND POFA DOES NOT PROTECT DRIVERS

example

I am the keeper of my vehicle and it gets a POFA compliant PCN from Parking Eye , its pointless not revealing the driver

even if my wife was the driver I can be held liable as keeper of the vehicle when POFA has been complied with , unless I were to name HER as the driver and then she would receive a PCN in her own name and have to plead it as the outed driver, as she would have to complain to the landowner too (and our MP)

but if my good lady was driving and I received a PCN from say APCOA or HIGHVIEW or UKPC then if it fails to comply with POFA (which those 3 fail to comply with for example) , then I as KEEPER of the vehicle have no liability and an easy win on appeal, especially if I was not the driver

so if MET complied with POFA then your whole saga on this thread has no meaning, sorry to say , the words do not matter in the case of a compliant PCN , capiche ?

Coupon-mad

But we are not telling you to pay.  Same as any other MET thread, really.  They are not litigious at the time of replying here.

tallac

Coupon-mad said:

But we are not telling you to pay.  Same as any other MET thread, really.  They are not litigious at the time of replying here.

Gotcha. So do the POPLA stage 2 appeal (with the provided POPLA code) and then just ignore any subsequent debt recovery letters until they give up trying.