Popla Verification Code Given

[Deleted User]

Smart Parking have rejected my appeal. I have not declared the driver of vehicle. Overstayed mistakingly. They have given me a Popla Verification Code. 

Can anybody point me in the right direction to find a winning POPLA appeal against Initial Parking at Manchester Airport Pub & Grill. 

I have been reading lots of threads, but I don't want to mess up the appeal and would kindly request some guidance on this. 

Coupon-mad

Smart Parking have rejected my appeal. I have not declared the driver of vehicle. Overstayed mistakingly. They have given me a Popla Verification Code. 

That'll be easy for the keeper to win, then!

All you do is search the forum (or Google search and look for forum posts that are not more than, say, two years old) and copy ANY SMART PARKING POPLA APPEAL ABOUT NO KEEPER LIABILITY.

A cinch.

D_P_Dance

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP., it can cause the scammer extra costs, and in some cases, cancellation. 

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 later this year,

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these companies, 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.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/of these Private Parking Companies.

Read what Pete Wishart MP said recently in the House of commons about Smart Parking.

"I am sick and tired of receiving emails from people complaining about the behaviour of parking companies, telling me that they will never again visit Perth city centre because of the negative experience they had when they had the misfortune to end up in a car park operated by one of these companies. I have received more complaints about one car park in the city of Perth than about any other issue. That car park is operated by the lone ranger of the parking cowboys: the hated and appalling Smart Parking—I see that many other Members are unfortunate enough to have Smart Parking operating in their constituencies. It has reached the stage where one member of my staff now spends a good part of each day just helping my constituents and visitors to my constituency to navigate the appeals process.
…
The BPA does not have the ability to regulate these companies and has shown no sign whatsoever that it is trying to get on top of some of the sharper practices. The BPA gives a veneer of legitimacy to some of the more outlandish rogue operators by including them in their membership, allowing them to continue to operate. The Bill will oblige operators such as Smart Parking to amend their practices.

Coupon-mad

Please now make a real difference.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

Le_Kirk

For a POPLA appeal you use all the appeal points available to you in the NEWBIE sticky third post, starting with the most important - No Keeper Liability.

Coupon-mad

You could even Google 'Smart Parking POPLA no keeper liability' and find a recent example.   Don't copy one from over 2 years ago.

This is simple, I said to find one someone had done earlier, not spend hours reading stuff.

AND - please now make a real difference - A TASK FOR SEPTEMBER.

The Government is (this month only) consulting about a new statutory code of practice (CoP) and framework to rein in the rogue parking firms.  Read and comment on the draft CoP proposal and the enforcement framework consultation, and get everyone you know to do the same.

You will need to register to comment on the CoP and enter an occupation even if you are retired or a homemaker, but otherwise it is easy to navigate, and comment upon each section/subsection individually. You can save comments to edit later and or submit comments once you are happy with them.

https://standardsdevelopment.bsigroup.com/projects/2020-00193#/section

You do not need to register to comment on the enforcement framework which can be found here. It has a link on page 5 to make comments.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913272/Code_Enforcement_Framework_consultation.pdf

At the very least, we say the parking charge level should be £50/£25 or higher level £70/£35, as per Council PCNs in E&W.  

And we say the added fake 'debt recovery' costs are just double counting the cost of letters, and MUST GO because that is unfair and illegal.

Please be heard.  You can bet the hundreds of PPCs will be commenting.

No apologies for repeating this vital 'call for action' to consumers, on every thread this month!

Le_Kirk

Notices to keeper do not have to comply with the BPA CoP but with the POFA.  They might well comply but only because BPA have copied the wording from the POFA into their CoP.  The CoP is a set of rules made up by the boy's club whereas the POFA is law.

MistyZ

I think you may have found an old appeal as Ground 3) Unfair terms doesn't apply anymore.  However it wouldn't do any harm to include it, it's just not relevant as far as I know.  It also does not include an 'Inadequate Signage' section or a 'No landowner Authority' section.  And both of those are standard sections to include.  

However the key section is Ground 1 and obviously that is included.  Check out this POPLA appeal which did win:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5786691/help-with-my-popla-appeal-draft-against-smart/p1  

Compare what you have here in Ground 1 with the same section in that appeal - they call it 'Keeper Liability'.  Are they the same?  And there are also Inadequate Signage and No landowner Authority sections to copy from that.

I haven't found any other winning SMART POPLA appeals within the last 2 years as yet.  But the one I link to did cover PoFA failings well, I think, and that's the section that should win.     

  

Umkomaas

Quick skim. 

Your strongest suit with a Smart Parking case is their failure to comply with PoFA. Your section on this is, IMHO, too rambling. You just need to say that the NtK does not comply with PoFA on the following grounds, therefore no keeper liability, and list them with the PoFA paragraph references alongside. 

1. Fails to invite the keeper to pay the parking charge - 9 (2)(e)(i)
2. Fails to deliver the relevant warning to the keeper - 9 (2)(f)
3. .......
4. .......

..... above are suggested examples of layout. You need to go through your NtK to determine the 'failures'. 

Unfair Terms - never seen a POPLA decision based on that appeal point

ANPR accuracy - an Alexander Armstrong appeal section (Pointless!). 

You haven't challenged far more potentially damaging areas for any parking firm - signage, authority to issue parking charges, and landowner contract. All these have near oven-ready templates in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, third post.

You have, dotted about through your draft instances of failure to meet parts of the BPA Code of Practice. I'd consolidate those into one section - Failure to Meet the Requirements of the BPA Code of Practice, then list the points you have and cross reference to the CoP. 

But, again, with Smart Parking, your strongest suit is PoFA failure. So go to town on that. 

Have you read the two recent Airport Grill threads, from memory, I think Smart cancelled when they saw the POPLA appeal. 

MistyZ

Umkomaas said:

But, again, with Smart Parking, your strongest suit is PoFA failure. So go to town on that. 

If the OP needs a 'ready-made' I think the appeal I linked to covers the PoFA failure quite well.

Coupon-mad

I agree and this was what I told them to copy from.  Easy to find, easy to copy.