POPLA caught secretly "coaching" BPA members on how to win POPLA appeals !!!

[tomtubby]

It would seem that the "independent" POPLA appeals body is not "independent" after all !!!

This morning I was sent a link to a parking "blog" which displays copies of emails obtained under the Feedom of Information Act which appears to demonstrate that POPLA have been secretly holding "coaching sessions" with parking companies In London and Birmingham.

These coaching sessions are designed to HELP the parking companies to WIN POPLA appeals !!!

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/popla-caught-secretly-coaching-parking.html

[green_and_mean]

A PPC cannot win an appeal they either have a valid claim or they do not how is 'coaching' going to change that? They are not providing legal advice on individual claims to either party, the website also provides non specific information to the public. Surely educating PPCs on working within the law is a good thing for the consumer?? Surely if their was some hidden agenda they would not need coaching as POPLA would just refuse all appeals after all London Councils have obviously all taken bribes from these PPCs and its all a big conspiracy against the poor hard done by driver!

[tomtubby]

G & M

 

Sorry duplicate reply.

[tomtubby]

G & M

 

I am really surprised at your response. The FOI has uncovered the fact that POPLA themselves apparently produced and circulated the 'witness statement' document (currently being used by Parking Eye amongst others) to the PPCs as a way of "circumventing" the problems that they have when required to evidence the contractual authority from the landowner.

 

Providing "coaching sessions" to the PPCs is not the role of the'Independent' Appeal Service.....that's the role of the BPA Ltd !!

 

Irrespective as to whether you think that is a good or not, POPLA has in my opinion now completely corrupted it's already tainted image of supposed 'Independence'.

 

It's not just about actually being Independent it's about being seen to be independent.

[green_and_mean]

G & M

 

I am really surprised at your response. The FOI has uncovered the fact that POPLA themselves apparently produced and circulated the 'witness statement' document (currently being used by Parking Eye amongst others) to the PPCs as a way of "circumventing" the problems that they have when required to evidence the contractual authority from the landowner.

 

Providing "coaching sessions" to the PPCs is not the role of the'Independent' Appeal Service.....that's the role of the BPA Ltd !!

 

Irrespective as to whether you think that is a good or not, POPLA has in my opinion now completely corrupted it's already tainted image of supposed 'Independence'.

 

It's not just about actually being Independent it's about being seen to be independent.

 

To be honest the blog is full of accusations and very little facts, the emails are between the BPA and PATAS and do not even say that POPLA held the workshops or that were secret. Maybe I could send a few emails saying I was running PATAS workshops and then you could accuse PATAS of being biased? What date were these secret workshops, where were they held, who attended? You are also assuming that telling someone how to fill a form is would sway their judgement in a case. Both PATAS and POPLAR provide extensive information to the public on the appeals process, how it works, what grounds may be used, key cases etc I don't think I've ever heard the parking industry moaning about them assisting the keeper to win? Even PATAS is accused of being biased because its funded by local authorities which is somehow seen to be different than being funded by central govt. Maybe the appeals services should be completely free from government or PPC funding and motorists should just pay the true total cost of the appeals process and hearing?

[ericsbrother]

As long as they get their full costs awarded at PATAS when they are successful, this wouldnt be a bad thing. Currently there is no incentive for councils to consider fully the appeal before it got that far. As for PPC's, they are the ones who are seeking legitimacy of a £200m a year business that is based on hot air so why should a motorist expect to fund a corrupt exercise? Look what happened when people started suing the clampers, the crooks just defaulted on the CCJ's and carried on under another name. Many of the worst offenders are still members of the BPA.

In other tribunals you dont get the judicial authority holding meetings with the defendants and government and LGO's provides guides to individual councils on how they should act not the justice department.

40% of the GDP of this country is based upon the motor vehicle so it is important that things are seen to be fair. Here we know that most people dont know the difference betweena PCN from a council and a "ticket" in a shopping centre car park and it is not right that claims to their purpose are spuriously made. Supermarkets could easily solve their parking problems at a stroke but choose to be lazy and outsource the problem. Some of my local supermarkets have an entry barrier that issues you with a ticket that you exchange for a barcode when you spend in the shop. That barcode releases the exit barrier. Simple.

[tomtubby]

For the month of May 2013 Parking Eye had issued 876 summons in relation to private parking and with the help and support of POPLA I dread to think how many summons had been issued by their next "bulk filing" date of 4th June !!

[lamma]

POPLA is most certainly NOT a judicial authority. For that matter neither are PATAS nor the TPT. Regardless of that this revelation at the very least casts very serious doubt on the 'independence' of POPLA.

[tomtubby]

If the Civil Court Users Association "coached" claimants on what to put on their claim forms etc there would be public outrage.

 

As far as I am concerned, POPLA will be tainted by this allegation....and so they should be.

 

Dreadful.

[DBC]

This story is now featured in the Daily Telegraph:- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/10219403/Private-parking-ombudsman-advising-enforcement-companies.html

[tomtubby]

This story really does make my blood boil.

[Surfer01]

The whole point of POPLA was to have a single communal database of motorist's appeals that could be accessed by any BPA member so that the collective information could be used to detriment of the motorist. We fell into that trap and gave POPLA all the various different appeals so they could devise a strategy to counter act defences raised in courts. How can an organisation like POPLA be independent if funded by the very people claiming against you?