Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Aaron Aadvark
    • By Aaron Aadvark 9th Mar 13, 4:49 PM
    • 230Posts
    • 409Thanks
    Aaron Aadvark
    POPLA Decisions
    • #1
    • 9th Mar 13, 4:49 PM
    POPLA Decisions 9th Mar 13 at 4:49 PM
    MSE Note:

    Hi! Please don't post any private details (yours or other peoples) on the forum for privacy reasons. Thanks!

    MSE Official Insert:

    Read our MoneySaving UK Travel & Transport guides to save more including Fight Private Parking Tickets and Parking Ticket Appeals.

    Back to Aaron Aadvark's original post....

    ----------------------------


    This thread is intended to be a compilation of all published POPLA decisions.

    Please add any decisions you are aware of.

    Please do not post requests for advice on this thread.

    Please start a new thread if you are looking advice.
    Last edited by Former MSE Andrea; 28-10-2016 at 8:29 AM.
Page 39
    • Computersaysno
    • By Computersaysno 25th Jan 14, 6:59 PM
    • 1,141 Posts
    • 914 Thanks
    Computersaysno
    Surely this 'PPC didn't send evidence pack' needs to be nailed.


    At the very least the PPC should be getting COPs...they are free after all.


    Where there is a history of this the PPC should have to send all stuff recorded/registered.
    There's a very very easy way to get rid of scumco 'fines'...but I'm not allowed to say what it is...because it involves lying to scummy parking companies [which some people say is illegal!!] and that's 'not allowed'.
    • Redx
    • By Redx 26th Jan 14, 8:36 AM
    • 25,053 Posts
    • 32,027 Thanks
    Redx
    UKCPS loss at Centretainment - Sheffield on NO AUTHORITY

    the contract was not signed or dated !

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4692033&page=2

    verdict posted here today but was a few months ago when received
    Last edited by Redx; 26-01-2014 at 10:10 AM.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 26th Jan 14, 11:23 AM
    • 9,031 Posts
    • 13,979 Thanks
    trisontana
    Trev throws in the towel (from CAG):-

    http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?410175-ANPR-Ltd-PCN-Appeal-Letter-POLA-ref-number-%2823-Viewing%29-nbsp

    My appeal was due to be heard this week, but I've just got a letter back from POPLA informing me that ANPR have now cancelled the parking charge notice. Therefore, my appeal has been allowed. Looks like ANPR decided that they didn't have a chance of winning and threw in the towel.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
    • bod1467
    • By bod1467 26th Jan 14, 11:27 AM
    • 14,794 Posts
    • 13,463 Thanks
    bod1467
    Do PPCs still get charged if they withdraw after a POPLA case has been raised? (i.e. withdraw prior to the actual assessment).
    • Computersaysno
    • By Computersaysno 26th Jan 14, 7:45 PM
    • 1,141 Posts
    • 914 Thanks
    Computersaysno
    iirc no they don't get charged
    There's a very very easy way to get rid of scumco 'fines'...but I'm not allowed to say what it is...because it involves lying to scummy parking companies [which some people say is illegal!!] and that's 'not allowed'.
    • torontoboy45
    • By torontoboy45 27th Jan 14, 3:05 PM
    • 1,026 Posts
    • 2,129 Thanks
    torontoboy45
    just out of interest: is anyone here keeping a tally of PE wins/losses?
    • Parking-Prankster
    • By Parking-Prankster 27th Jan 14, 4:27 PM
    • 311 Posts
    • 1,164 Thanks
    Parking-Prankster
    just out of interest: is anyone here keeping a tally of PE wins/losses?
    Originally posted by torontoboy45


    That would be me.


    http://parking-prankster.com/exhibits.html


    exhibit ex022


    Not quite up to date, but good enough
    Hi, we’ve approved your signature. It's awesome. Please email the forum team if you want more praise - MSE ForumTeam
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 28th Jan 14, 10:03 AM
    • 9,031 Posts
    • 13,979 Thanks
    trisontana
    Another GPEOL loss for Excel at the Peel Centre:-

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87375&hl=
    Last edited by trisontana; 30-01-2014 at 6:56 AM.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Jan 14, 11:20 AM
    • 76,795 Posts
    • 90,174 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Another GPEOL loss for VCS at the Peel Centre:-

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87375&hl=
    Originally posted by trisontana

    Well worth a read, shows an OP who read the pepipoo forum, learnt how to win at POPLA and enjoyed doing so even though Excel sent 54 PAGES of evidence!

    'And the registration number input incorrectly was ……………………………. P155 OFF.
    The teenage daughter tasked with obtaining the ticket was grounded for a considerable amount of time, and the sanction was only lifted when she could sing, without repetition, hesitation or deviation, the British Parking Association Code of Practice (all 42 pages) to the tune of ‘Always Look on the Bright Side of Life’.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • mykutu
    • By mykutu 28th Jan 14, 2:23 PM
    • 9 Posts
    • 9 Thanks
    mykutu
    CPP Fine cancelled
    Just to let everyone in this forum know that I have received an email from POPLA informing below -

    Dear Sir or Madam
    Myself (Appellant)
    -v-
    Liberty Printers (ar & Rf Reddin) Ltd Also T/a Liberty Services Ltd And Car Parking Partnership Ltd (Operator)

    The Operator has informed us that they have cancelled parking charge notice number ********, issued in respect of a vehicle with the registration mark XXXXXX .

    Your appeal has therefore been allowed by order of the Lead Adjudicator.

    You are not liable for the parking charge and, where appropriate, any amounts already paid in respect of this parking charge notice will be refunded by the Operator.
    I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone in this forum for all the helpful advice.

    Thanks
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Jan 14, 2:25 PM
    • 76,795 Posts
    • 90,174 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Just to let everyone in this forum know that I have received an email from POPLA informing below -

    I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone in this forum for all the helpful advice.

    Thanks
    Originally posted by mykutu
    The words 'thrown in' and 'towel' describe CPP's reaction to your super POPLA appeal wording here:

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4842545

    Good stuff, newbies can learn from your success.
    PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT UNLESS IN SCOTLAND OR NI
    TWO Clicks needed Look up, top of the page:
    Main site>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD
    • 4consumerrights
    • By 4consumerrights 28th Jan 14, 4:17 PM
    • 1,960 Posts
    • 2,842 Thanks
    4consumerrights
    Washalowski appeal upheld: UKCPS

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4820345&page=3

    Richard Reeve signed the Email letter. UKCPS cancelled the PCN. They did not reply to requests for docs or £100 breakdown of costs. They simply capitulated. So POPLA simply say that my appeal will be allowed by order of the Senior Adjudicator.
    (I wonder if this has anything to do with their dodgy codes as well)
    Last edited by 4consumerrights; 28-01-2014 at 4:30 PM. Reason: edit reason for POPLA win
    • Sassii
    • By Sassii 28th Jan 14, 7:08 PM
    • 248 Posts
    • 209 Thanks
    Sassii
    Operator canceled PCNs when it reach to POPLA
    28 January 2014
    Reference 5763533507
    always quote in any communication with POPLA
    Dear Sir or Madam
    (Appellant)
    -v-
    Parking Control Management (uk) Limited (Operator)
    The Operator has informed us that they have cancelled parking charge notice number XXXX, issued in respect of a vehicle with the registration mark XXXX.
    Your appeal has therefore been allowed by order of the Lead Adjudicator.
    You are not liable for the parking charge and, where appropriate, any amounts already paid in respect of this parking charge notice will be refunded by the Operator

    Yours sincerely,
    Richard Reeve
    Service Manager


    Original post http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4833449
    • Redx
    • By Redx 29th Jan 14, 12:48 PM
    • 25,053 Posts
    • 32,027 Thanks
    Redx
    another successful POPLA appeal against PE at Fistral Beach

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4812014&page=6 post #119
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • blawford
    • By blawford 29th Jan 14, 2:36 PM
    • 37 Posts
    • 20 Thanks
    blawford
    A win for me after receiving a ticket from UKPC while parked in my residents space "without clearly displaying my permit".

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4613139

    Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

    The Operator issued parking charge notice number [removed] arising out of the presence at [removed], on 22 May 2013, of a vehicle with registration mark [removed]. The Operator recorded that the vehicle was parked in a residents parking space without clearly displaying a valid residents parking permit.

    The Appellant has made various representations; I have not dealt with them all as I am allowing this appeal on the following ground.

    The Appellant has made representations, alluding to the case of Vehicle Control Services Limited - and - The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC) the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) where it was held that without landowner rights of possession, they cannot make a contract with a driver using this facility. The Appellant submits
    that the Operator does not have this authority.

    The Operator rejected the representations, because The Operator submits that they have authority from the landowner to issue parking charge notices at the site.

    The case of VCS v HMRC concerned Value Added Tax but, In Paragraph 46 of the Decision, it states:

    VCS is permitted under the contract [with the landowner] to collect and retain all fees and charges from parking enforcement action.

    This case has now been considered by the Court of Appeal ([2013] EWCA Civ 186) where, in allowing the appeal of VCS, the Court held:

    In the present case the contract between VCS and the landowner gives VCS the right to eject trespassers. That is plain from the fact that it is entitled to tow away vehicles that infringe the terms of parking. The contract between VCS and the motorist gives VCS the same right. Given that the motorist has accepted a permit on terms that if the conditions are broken his car is liable to be towed away, I do not consider that it would be open to a motorist to deny that VCS has the right to do that which the contract says it can. In order to vindicate those rights, it is necessary for VCS to have the right to sue in trespass. If, instead of towing away a vehicle, VCS imposes a parking charge I see no impediment to regarding that as damages for trespass.

    The material events occurred before the coming into force of Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. However, it is clear that, subject to the terms of the contract between them and the landowner, an operator may issue a parking charge notice to a vehicle for a breach of conditions of parking.

    Membership of the Approved Operator Scheme does require the parking company to have clear authorisation from the landowner (if the Operator is not the landowner) to manage and enforce parking. This is set out in the British Parking Association Code of Practice. Therefore the Operator is likely to have authority to issue parking charge notices. However, as with any issue, if the point is specially raised by an appellant, then the operator should address it by producing such evidence as they believe refutes a submission that they have no authority. A copy of the written authority the Operator submits they have from the landowner has not been produced.

    Therefore, having carefully considered all the evidence before me, I must find as a fact that, on this particular occasion, the Operator has not shown that they have authority from the landowner to issue parking charge notices. As the Appellant submits that the Operator does not have authority, the burden of proof shifts to the Operator to prove otherwise. The Operator has not discharged this burden.

    Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

    Amber Ahmed
    Assessor
    Thanks to everyone who helped.
    • Aaron Aadvark
    • By Aaron Aadvark 29th Jan 14, 10:18 PM
    • 230 Posts
    • 409 Thanks
    Aaron Aadvark
    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87415

    Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

    The operator issued parking charge notice number ****** arising out of the presence at Piccadilly Car Park, on 11 July 2013, of a vehicle with registration mark *******. The operator recorded that the vehicle was not displaying a valid ticket.

    The appellant has made various representations;

    I have not dealt with them all as I am allowing this appeal on the following ground.

    It is the appellant’s case that the amount of the parking charge is not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

    The operator’s case is that the charge is a genuine pre – estimate of loss, the operator has sought to justify this by providing, amongst other things a list of their business expenses such as patrolling officers fuel costs, vehicle insurance and vehicle maintenance, however this does not justify a loss resulting from a breach. The operator would have incurred these costs even if the breach did
    not occur.

    Considering carefully all the evidence before me, I find that, the parking charge sought is a sum by way of damages. I also find that the damages sought on this particular occasion do not amount to a genuine pre- estimate of loss.

    Accordingly, this appeal must be allowed.

    Amber Ahmed
    • Chickabiddybex
    • By Chickabiddybex 30th Jan 14, 11:52 AM
    • 1,330 Posts
    • 1,627 Thanks
    Chickabiddybex
    POPLA decided in my favour against Parking-Eye
    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4807051

    Not a pre-estimate of loss and the wording of the sign suggests that it should be.

    Hi. I'm a Board Guide on the Gaming, Consumer Rights, Ebay and Praise/Vent boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an abusive or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com (it's not part of my role to deal with abuse). Any views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com
    • Redx
    • By Redx 31st Jan 14, 10:09 AM
    • 25,053 Posts
    • 32,027 Thanks
    Redx
    TPS loss based on GPEOL

    two separate visits of 30 minutes each to the Cambridge Retail Park on 26 Oct.

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4836350&page=2

    post #29


    Just received the decision from POPLA: My appeal is allowed based on GPEOL.

    Thank you so much to everyone especially Coupon-mad and Guys Dad for helping me. Justice has been served.

    One thing to note, TPS sent me their response to POPLA and in that they included a printout of this thread. Yes, this exact thread. TPS wrote: "Having noticed a thread of correspondence relating to this case on an internet forum we can't help but feeling this case has no real merit and should not be treated as a genuine appeal. Most of the content posted on the POPLA appeal form was provided by a number of forum users."

    POPLA's decision:

    (Appellant)
    -v-
    Total Parking Solutions Ltd (Operator)


    The Operator issued parking charge notice number CTxxxxxxx arising out of the presence at Cambridge Retail Park, on October xx 2013, of a vehicle with registration mark xxxxxxx.

    The Appellant appealed against liability for the parking charge.

    The Assessor has considered the evidence of both parties and has determined that the appeal be allowed.

    The Assessor’s reasons are as set out.

    The Operator should now cancel the parking charge notice forthwith.

    Reasons for the Assessor’s Determination

    At xx:xx, on October xx 2013, a CCTV automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) system recorded the Appellant’s vehicle entering the Cambridge Retail Park.

    The Operator’s case is that the Appellant breached the car parking conditions by exceeding the maximum stay time permitted at the site.

    The Appellant made representations stating his case. The Appellant raised a number of points and one of them was that the amount determined was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

    The Appellant has submitted that the parking charge does not reflect the Operator’s loss, and so is not enforceable. The Operator has not addressed this submission.

    It appears to be the Appellant’s case that the parking charge represents a sum for specified damages, in other words compensation agreed in advance. Accordingly, the charge must represent a genuine pre-estimate of the loss caused by the alleged breach.

    The Operator does not appear to dispute that the sum represents damages, and has not attempted to justify the charge as a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

    Consequently, I have no evidence before me to refute the Appellant’s submission that the parking charge is unenforceable.

    I need not decide any other issues.

    Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • Redx
    • By Redx 31st Jan 14, 10:11 AM
    • 25,053 Posts
    • 32,027 Thanks
    Redx
    EXCEL loss again at the PEEL CENTRE stockport

    not a gpeol

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4761346&page=4 post #63

    its taken SOOOOO long but the results of a appeal came through this morning.

    i won
    it seems my email was take into consideration

    Thank you so much haha

    "It is the Operator’s case that a vehicle with the registration mark XXXXXX
    was recorded entering the site at 20:26 and exiting at 21:17, recording a total
    stay of 51 minutes without displaying a valid ticket/permit for parking.
    It is the Appellant’s case that the Operator has no legal capacity to issue and
    enforce parking charge notices and that the charge sought is a unlawful
    penalty.
    The Appellant has submitted that the parking charge does not reflect the
    Operator’s loss, and so is not enforceable. The Operator has not addressed
    this submission.
    It appears to be the Appellant’s case that the parking charge represents a
    sum for specified damages, in other words compensation agreed in
    advance. Accordingly, the charge must represent a genuine pre-estimate of
    the loss caused by the alleged breach.
    The Operator does not appear to dispute that the sum represents damages,
    and has not attempted to justify the charge as a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
    Consequently, I have no evidence before me to refute the Appellant’s
    submission that the parking charge is unenforceable.
    Accordingly, I must allow the appeal."
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • trisontana
    • By trisontana 31st Jan 14, 10:48 AM
    • 9,031 Posts
    • 13,979 Thanks
    trisontana
    SIP no GPEOL:-

    http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=87023&hl=

    Hi,

    I just won a POPLA appeal against this company.

    If you havent already, appeal the charge based on the fact you paid the money to them (albeit for a different vehicle)
    They have therefore suffered no financial loss.
    What part of "A whop bop-a-lu a whop bam boo" don't you understand?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,027Posts Today

7,447Users online

Martin's Twitter