IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Some help with NSL parking, Stansted airport, please
Comments
-
SusanJP said:I've got a decision! Successful==========================Summary of case: The appellant has provided a document detailing their appeal and a copy of the PCN. The appellant believes that the operator’s images have been altered. They advise that there was no option but to select vehicle driver when appealing to the operator. The appellant disputes that the operator has complied with the requirements of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. The appellant disputes that the states terms and conditions were breached. They believe that the amount of the PCN contravenes the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The appellants questions the adequacy of the signs at the site. The appellant disputes that the operator has the relevant authority to issue PCN. The appellant advise that the operator has not allowed a grace period. The appellant has commented on the parking operator’s evidence.
Rationale: When assessing an appeal POPLA considers if the operator has issued the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) correctly and if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park. I am allowing this appeal, I will explain my reasons below. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 advises that the provisions contained within it can only be used on relevant land and that this is land which is not subject to statutory control. In this case the PCN was issued on an airport. While the operator has shown that it has a contract for the management of the site it has not show that the land is not subject to statutory control under airport byelaws and as such I cannot consider that it is relevant land. As I am allowing the appeal on this basis I do not need to consider any other grounds of appeal.==========================Thanks to this forum for all the useful information I found here, and for those who've replied in this thread.
So, my case is over, I can move on. Before I do, what are your suggestions for what I can do now or where I can post this so that others benefit?
It also reads as though someone other than a low-level Assessor wrote that. It's completely new POPLA 'rational' wording.
I'm guessing, but I now expect to hear from Gemma at the BPA next week, closing the complaint I made and telling me that POPLA has sorted their training out on this area and NSL will have been 'told' to remove the POFA wording from Airport NTKs and to stop telling POPLA lies about keeper liability.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of this/any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD2 -
I received assurances below: -I do thank you for highlighting it to us that the word ‘rational’ is being used instead of ‘rationale’ and I do appreciate both words have different meanings, I have fed this back internally and it will be included in our program of continuous improvement.This was on 28/06/23 but maybe things move slowly in POPLA land.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 346.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 251.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 451.4K Spending & Discounts
- 238.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 614.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 174.8K Life & Family
- 252K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards