POPLA Appeal, Fight or Quit? Options

[rich2568]

The driver has a PCN for returning within 6mins in a "No Return Within 1hr" car park managed by Northern Parking Services of 22 Wenlock Rd, London, N1 7GU.

The driver & was totally unaware such a rule existed! The driver certainly doesn't have £100 spare to pay for a ridiculous 'breach' of their so called T & C, s!

We will obviously appeal as a different driver then revisited the car park!

Any help in the appeal letter would be very much appreciated 👍🙂

This post has been edited by rich2568: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 - 19:08

[Advertisement]

[Churchmouse]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...edule/4/enacted

state that the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and invite the keeper—
(i)to pay the unpaid parking charges; or
(ii)if the keeper was not the driver of the vehicle, to notify the creditor of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and to pass the notice on to the driver;

The PCN seems to be missing an explicit invitation to the keeper to pay the unpaid parking charges. Hard to see that being a coup de grâce, though. Arguably, the entire NtK is an invitation to the keeper to pay the unpaid parking charges!

--Churchmouse

[rich2568]

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9...edule/4/enacted

Thanks.... Just can't fathom out where I'm supposed to be looking though 🙄

[cabbyman]

You're not doing much reading!

Aside from reading the whole of sched 4 and understanding it (It's not that long as statute law goes!), you obviously haven't even read the replies to you in this thread!

In addition, you need to get out of this thread and read some other cases. We don't do the work for you. We point you in a direction and YOU do the work.

[rich2568]

I see they've quoted S9..(2)(b) on reverse of PCN... Holding the keeper to ransom to tell them the driver details.... Is this normal for them to frighten the keeper but more importantly will the keeper have to disclose eventually.?

[cabbyman]

You're still not doing much reading.

I don't recall the words 'holding keeper to ransom to tell them the driver details' anywhere in PoFA let alone para 9(2)(b).

Spend some time reading other threads, including some linked in completed cases.

[rich2568]

You're still not doing much reading.

I don't recall the words 'holding keeper to ransom to tell them the driver details' anywhere in PoFA let alone para 9(2)(b).

Spend some time reading other threads, including some linked in completed cases.

Correct- misread it.

This post has been edited by rich2568: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 - 16:02

[ostell]

No, it is inviting the keeper to supply the driver details, the one that created the contract. It is not saying the keeper is obliged to supply. Indeed the keeper may not even knwo the drivers identity.

[rich2568]

Is it worthwile going down the road of lack of proof both entries into the car park were the same driver- or would POPLA look at the ANPR still images and make their own judgment?

[nosferatu1001]

You can certainly assert that
If they are different drivers then POPLA looking at ANPR wont do any harm, presuming of course the ANPR captured the drivers at all...

But you dont say "no proof they werent the same driver". Thats a weak ass statement to make
You ASSERT they were TWO DIFFERENT DRIVERS and as any contract can *only* lie with the driver, NEITHER driver can have bnroken the "no return..." clause.

This post has been edited by nosferatu1001: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 - 09:12

[cabbyman]

Never ask for proof. If they supply proof, you have lost the argument on that point.

[trickydriver1]

Hi-

Im new to all this & was told to post on here to get help from more experienced people who have been there....

In Summarising, Im currently at POPLA stage & am looking to retaliate to the parking company points raised....

Does anyone want to have a look at my draft response?

Obviously I`m sure there must be parking company snoopers who come on here..So it would be more helpful for more possible private discussions by DM/email??..........

[SchoolRunMum]

No need, it's only POPLA and if you lose you still ignore them unless they try a small claim. We don;t even keep defences for small claims secret, and people still win them too.

Which PPC?

What were the circumstances, type of car park, alleged breach?

Did your appeal blab about who the driver was, or was it a decent appeal from the keeper not talking about the story of what happened?

[Jlc]

Put it here.

[trickydriver1]

Put it here.

The company has posted their rebuttal of the appeal points at POPLA... so Im assuming they cannot use anything else within these threads to their advantage before a decision is made?

But what if they issue a Small Court Claim ? I assume they will revisit the appropriate thread for further updates?

[SchoolRunMum]

Which PPC, calm down. No need to hide. Many BPA members never try court.

Last time a PPC tried to use a pepipoo thread they were handed on a plate by someone malicious who gave it to them to try to score points, the PPC still lost (Lamilad's cases v Excel).

[trickydriver1]

Which PPC, calm down. No need to hide. Many BPA members never try court.

Last time a PPC tried to use a pepipoo thread they were handed on a plate by someone malicious who gave it to them to try to score points, the PPC still lost (Lamilad's cases v Excel).

In their POPLA fight they (NPS) have used my own thread whereby I claim to have `admitted` to have breached a No Waiting condition.......

[SchoolRunMum]

Hilarious drivel - show us, face this head on!

POPLA will not consider third party forum posts who could even be posted in someone's name by the PPC themselves, or another family or friend third party (not the appellant)!

[trickydriver1]

Hilarious drivel - show us, face this head on!

POPLA will not consider third party forum posts who could even be posted in someone's name by the PPC themselves, or another family or friend third party (not the appellant)!

So its uncommon for the Apellant to use Pepipoo Threads to win cases at POPLA? They have used my upolad of the PCN to state to POPLA ""Before we consider the points raised by the vehicle keeper, we would like to refer to the Pepipoo forums, especially the following location:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=121708

This particular thread on the motorist-friendly Pepipoo forums discusses this Parking Charge Notice. We know this, as the keeper kindly uploaded a redacted copy of their Parking Charge Notice. The unredacted version is included within the submitted PoPLA PCN Pack"

Read Post 27 & Post 30 as NPS state their is a contradiction based on these posts whereby the driver is admitted to returning within the no waiting period

[SchoolRunMum]

So its uncommon for the Apellant to use Pepipoo Threads to win cases at POPLA?

The appellant is YOU.

The PPC is desperate and POPLA will not consider a third party anonymous forum post as evidence of anything, as even the scumbags could have planted it!

Northern Parking Services then, I see from your link. Desperate idiots, they need to get a real job to help Society instead of this scam industry.

[trickydriver1]

So its uncommon for the Apellant to use Pepipoo Threads to win cases at POPLA?

The appellant is YOU.

The PPC is desperate and POPLA will not consider a third party anonymous forum post as evidence of anything, as even the scumbags could have planted it!

Northern Parking Services then, I see from your link. Desperate idiots, they need to get a real job to help Society instead of this scam industry.

oops- sorry of course I`m the Appellant !
Do you want to see the rest of their response?

This post has been edited by trickydriver1: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 - 21:41