PCN National Parking Enforcement 3 minutes 1 second in a parent and child bay with child in back..

Umkomaas

yellowstickers said:

I've just realised, I don't think I have at any stage completed a POPLA appeal for this. The appeal "dismissal" contained no reference thereto; what have I missed here?

POPLA has never been an option for you. NPE is an IPC operator and their second stage appeal service is the IAS, where only around 5% of appeals succeed, and hence why we rarely recommend appealing to them, and in any case, you're way too late for that. 

yellowstickers

Umkomaas said:

yellowstickers said:

I've just realised, I don't think I have at any stage completed a POPLA appeal for this. The appeal "dismissal" contained no reference thereto; what have I missed here?

POPLA has never been an option for you. NPE is an IPC operator and their second stage appeal service is the IAS, where only around 5% of appeals succeed, and hence why we rarely recommend appealing to them, and in any case, you're way too late for that. 

Ah thank you for clarifying - and, fear not, lengthy and detailed appeals, and reappeals, were lodged in incredibly timely fashion, to apparently not even be read 😂

yellowstickers

Out of interest, what is the deciding factor in those roughly 5% of successful instances? As I say, mine were clearly not even read, so it must be as clear cut as the recipient having never owned a car, or the nonexistence of the suggested car park 

yellowstickers

Grizebeck said:

Not relevant for this case
You need to move on and forget about it unless you get a court claim

Not an option, I'm afraid - I need answers and reparations.

Umkomaas

yellowstickers said:

Out of interest, what is the deciding factor in those roughly 5% of successful instances? As I say, mine were clearly not even read, so it must be as clear cut as the recipient having never owned a car, or the nonexistence of the suggested car park 

Very, very hard and detailed evidence that the operator finds impossible to refute.  So few cases, to the point it's not worth even trying to record any pattern. If you've got a few years of your life to waste, have a search through the forum to try to work out any pattern. On the other hand, carry on with your life! 🙂

Grizebeck

yellowstickers said:

Grizebeck said:

Not relevant for this case
You need to move on and forget about it unless you get a court claim

Not an option, I'm afraid - I need answers and reparations.

then you are going to be very disappointed
Sorry but you wont get any where this, move on unless you want to waste more of your time

Coupon-mad

yellowstickers said:

Grizebeck said:

Not relevant for this case
You need to move on and forget about it unless you get a court claim

Not an option, I'm afraid - I need answers and reparations.

Sorry but that is the correct advice.  Come back if you get a court claim.

In the meantime you can complain to the landowner and ask your MP to weigh in with a complaint to help you.

yellowstickers

So, Co-op has finally, albeit tacitly, conceded that the signage at Combs Ford is completely inadequate and entirely overhauled/replaced it. This now, of course, gives rise to a further avenue of complaint; PPCs only have recourse to a keeper's data if every aspect of their operation is in line with the relevant CoP, I am led to believe. As the signage did not align with the IPC CoP on at least four counts, the victim of NPE's ensuing campaign has been advised to pursue a breach under contemporary GDPR laws. I had a call from their head of member services today; it is bewildering that such positions are occupied by those so devoid of legal acumen or basic common sense!

patient_dream

yellowstickers said:

Out of interest, what is the deciding factor in those roughly 5% of successful instances? As I say, mine were clearly not even read, so it must be as clear cut as the recipient having never owned a car, or the nonexistence of the suggested car park 

 what is the deciding factor in those roughly 5% of successful instances?
SIMPLE ... The IPC/IAS/GLADSTONES want their money scammer members to make money

 You need to understand this scam in more detail.
It all starts with Gladstones solicitors, messrs Davies and Hurley.
For some reason the government were stupid enough to give them ATA status which means they could recruit private parking money scammers and give them access to the DVLA database
This was called the IPC and the appeals service they called the IAS

So, what happened is the IPC members would reject appeals and the second appeal service being the IAS would also reject the appeal.
In the shadows, waiting to pounce was Gladstones solicitors who then went on to sue people.

This mega scam was exposed by the Parking Prankster and all of a sudden, Davies and Hurley split, Davies being Gladstones and Hurley being the IPC ...... A MEGA SCAM designed to extort money from the motorist

And, the government know about this scam yet fail to terminate these money scammers

The Co-op has history of employing money scammers. A few years ago using another PPC, they terminated them. What happening then was a disgrace ...... the PPC sued CO-OP staff members

Does the Co-op have such short memories yet they still take on money scammers
In your case, they have admitted the signs are not suitable as in most Co-op parking signs

This alone is a big problem for the Co-op and indeed for National Parking and any stupid legal who gets involved (probably Gladstones)
One would assume that the Co-op knows that you can  include them in any court claim as witness

Best thing the Co-op can do is terminate National Parking as it's not just shop lifters that are losing them money

Your MP is a good source, if they are Tory, to raise this blatant scam to the Dept of levelling up
Every Tory does not know if they will have a job in a year

Coupon-mad

You had a call from the Co-op trying to fob you off because they are clueless about the legal position?