POPLA appeal rejected

Blitzy777

Hi everyone,

My daughter (19)  was issued with a parking ticket at Town Quay car park whilst waiting to pick me up from a Red funnel ferry. She was there 20 mins (5 mins over the wait time) she did t realise she had to pay (no did i tbh) as she wasn't in a bay but in the wait zone. Anyway we appealed through Parking Mate (paid £4.99 for their letter) that didn't work so they sent us their POPLA appeal letter, we found out yesterday that didn't work either. My daughter is only 19 and at Uni wanting to join the Police, so she wants to pay the £100 fine as she does t want to risk going to court. Is there anything left we can do before she pays other then go to court. If it were me I would take them all the way! Esp as I now read that the car park is on Harbour land and under different bye laws 😕. Didn't know that before the POPLA appeal, I just trusted that the Parking mate letter would work 🤦‍♀️.
TIA for any help.
Kind regards, Nikki.

Fruitcake

It is not a fine.

Which PPC issued the charge? Was it ParkingEye at Southampton Town Quay?

I have never heard of Parking Mate, but if they didn't use bylaws/no keeper liability and/or revealed the driver's identity, then it was worse than money down the drain.

Was the driver's identity revealed during the appeals stage?

PoPLA appeal decisions are not binding on the motorist and can be ignored.

There is no risk in going to court, and unlike PoPLA and the IAS, it is independent. 

You should get photos of the site and signage as the old PPC signs were left behind. If they are still there, then it would cause confusion because a motorist would not know which PPC was operating on site.

Blitzy777

Hi Fruitcake,

Many thanks for your reply.

Unfortunately they didn't use the bylaws argument but they did use no keeper liability and the drivers name was not revealed in the appeals process.
I am unable to get photos, unfortunately as I'm on the Isle of Wight and would cost me nearly as much as the penalty charge to get over there. Totally my fault for trusting parking mate for their appeal letter (they have got my husband out of a charge before, which is why I used them) and not doing my own research. 
The thought of going to court terrifies my daughter, so not any option but to pay them 😤

Gr1pr

So was it Parking Eye of Chorley that issued the PCN letter  ?

Not paying and going to court wont affect her joining the police, it's a civil dispute over money,  not a criminal matter 

Fruitcake

Blitzy777 said:

Hi Fruitcake,

Many thanks for your reply.

Unfortunately they didn't use the bylaws argument but they did use no keeper liability and the drivers name was not revealed in the appeals process.
I am unable to get photos, unfortunately as I'm on the Isle of Wight and would cost me nearly as much as the penalty charge to get over there. Totally my fault for trusting parking mate for their appeal letter (they have got my husband out of a charge before, which is why I used them) and not doing my own research. 
The thought of going to court terrifies my daughter, so not any option but to pay them 😤

That's good news. In any future correspondence with ParkingEye, state that since the land is covered by Port Authority Bylaws (they should be available online) the keeper cannot be held liable. Since the driver's identity will not be revealed, PE should cancel now and save themselves money.
Repeat, repeat, repeat the above in every response.

Ignore powerless debt collectors, or repeat the above again and again.

Nobody here will advise anyone to pay this charge.

My apologies. I looked at Google Streetview and realise now the car park is not the one I was thinking of, so isn't going to have signs from the previous operator. Don't worry about getting photos at the moment.

Blitzy777

This is the part of the appeal letter that states keeper but not driver. Is this right/ok?
I'm going to write to Parking Eye and quote the by laws and hope that they cancel the ticket. 
Thank you for all your help, it's very much appreciated. 

Gr1pr

Only the keeper can deal with this,  not a different data subject 

If the popla appeal was rejected by Popla,  there is no further contact until the Letter of Claim stage,  before any future court claim 

The keeper popla appeal should have included the details of no keeper liability due to schedule 4 of POFA2012 not applying on non relevant land like ports

Blitzy777

Gr1pr said:

Only the keeper can deal with this,  not a different data subject 

If the popla appeal was rejected by Popla,  there is no further contact until the Letter of Claim stage,  before any future court claim 

The keeper popla appeal should have included the details of no keeper liability due to schedule 4 of POFA2012 not applying on non relevant land like ports

The POPLA appeal did include 'schedule 4 of POFA2012 not applying on non relevant land' but they still rejected it.

Gr1pr

But we have not seen the Popla appeal or the Popla decision yet,, nothing so far about bylaws etc , what you have posted is part of the appeal to Parking Eye by the third party

If I understand the case correctly,  the daughter is the Registered Keeper or hirer or lessee and so they would be the data subject,  you appear to be a helper relative but are otherwise a stranger to the legal case,  so I meant that you are not the complainant or victim 

prowla

It's important that members of the Police Force understand the law.

These "fines" are invoices from private companies for transgressions of contrived rules designed to catch you out (that's their business model).

It is often the case that these Private Parking Companies (PPCs) don't comply with the legal requirements and therefore their invoices are invalid.

One key thing is to never identify oneself as the driver.

Popla will (almost) always reject an appeal, because they are the representative of the PPC industry and are not impartial.

It is the biggest ongoing nationwide scam in operation.

There is aprocess which needs to be followed and the folks here can give great advice on dealing with these scammers.

If it does go to court, and you lose, all you have to do then is pay up and that's the end of it.

Blitzy777

Gr1pr said:

But we have not seen the Popla appeal or the Popla decision yet,, nothing so far about bylaws etc , what you have posted is part of the appeal to Parking Eye by the third party

If I understand the case correctly,  the daughter is the Registered Keeper or hirer or lessee and so they would be the data subject,  you appear to be a helper relative but are otherwise a stranger to the legal case,  so I meant that you are not the complainant or victim 

There is a lot more to the appeal letter then I have posted. The company who devised the Letter 'Parking Mate' used the same letter to POPLA as they did to PE in the first instance. I was led by their advice, rightly or wrongly. I am dealing with this for my daughter because she is only young and has no idea about these things. I can post the rest of the appeal letter, I'm afraid it's all double Dutch to me....ive never had a PCN.....guess I've just been lucky!
All she keeps saying is she does not want to go to court and would rather pay it, as its not my ticket I can stop her paying it but I would rather she didn't!
So am I understanding that as the POPLA appeal was rejected i cannot contact PE again?