Do I have a golden ticket NTK?

mattyjay98

B789 said:

"This Parking Charge Notice is not POFA compliant, however, payment can still be sought under the old ‘implied-contract-with-the-driver’ rules used prior to POFA."

I have to go clean my keyboard now as I splurted my coffee all over it when I read that bit. Talk about the dregs of the industry trying to scam their victims.

Whilst it may or may not be  "Golden Ticket" will depend on whether the driver has been identified, directly or indirectly. It's "Golden" if the PCN is non POFA or breaches the requirements of POFA. All POFA gives is the ability to transfer the claim to the RK if the drivers details are not known. Too many victims think they've go an easily winnable case because their PCN is not POFA compliant but have identified the driver through errors such as in their initial appeal they have blurted out things like "I was parked in blah blah..." or "My son parked in blah blah..." instead of stating "The driver parked in blah blah...".

The driver has not been identified. The first appeal was submitted using the blue template on the newbies sticky.

On that basis, how would you advise I structure/edit the PoPLA appeal please? 

Thanks for your advice.

mattyjay98

Also, I do not have a copy of the appeal as I stupidly did not keep a record of it. 

Coupon-mad

You just do a POPLA appeal as per the third post of the NEWBIES thread and add in as your first paragraph that the Operator has admitted "This Parking Charge Notice is not POFA compliant, however, payment can still be sought under the old ‘implied-contract-with-the-driver’ rules used prior to POFA."  Therefore, they must lose this appeal because the driver has never been identified.

mattyjay98

Coupon-mad said:

You just do a POPLA appeal as per the third post of the NEWBIES thread and add in as your first paragraph that the Operator has admitted "This Parking Charge Notice is not POFA compliant, however, payment can still be sought under the old ‘implied-contract-with-the-driver’ rules used prior to POFA."  Therefore, they must lose this appeal because the driver has never been identified.

Thanks CM. Just to clarify, I add in my first paragraph 

1) "the Operator has admitted "This Parking Charge Notice is not POFA compliant, however, payment can still be sought under the old ‘implied-contract-with-the-driver’ rules used prior to POFA."  Therefore, they must lose this appeal because the driver has never been identified"

OR 

2) "the Operator has admitted "This Parking Charge Notice is not POFA compliant, however, payment can still be sought under the old ‘implied-contract-with-the-driver’ rules used prior to POFA."

Thank you

Coupon-mad

Whatever you think best but you are not 'adding it' to your first paragraph.  It is your first appeal point.

mattyjay98

@Coupon-mad

@KeithP

Please could you read the final PoPLA draft and give feedback and advise if ready to send? Thanks again for your time and help.

hxxps://drive.google.com/file/d/1MHdkxmoplSk_VN2zcjvxPQ5m9wz9Tjo8/view?usp=sharing

B789

Personally, I think you should lead with the simple fact that as the PCN is non-POFA and as the identity of the driver is unknown, liability cannot be transferred to the registered keeper.

All the stuff about the dates would only be important if the PCN was POFA compliant but arrived late.

mattyjay98

ThanB789 said:

Personally, I think you should lead with the simple fact that as the PCN is non-POFA and as the identity of the driver is unknown, liability cannot be transferred to the registered keeper.

All the stuff about the dates would only be important if the PCN was POFA compliant but arrived late.

Thanks for the response, makes sense. Are others of the same opinion as above?

Thanks

mattyjay98

Bump, anyone else able to review please so I can get PoPLA response off please?

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Can't get the link to work.  Why not copy & paste it here for more comments?