Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Bank the cheque.  No doubt it will bounce - but you never know. When it bounces - that is when you are meant to access their website link and enter your personal details - but of course - DON'T.
    • Wayne Ting, chief executive of e-scooter firm Lime, says there's room for improvement. View the full article
    • If you are absolutely certain* that you were parked OK, write a letter of complaint to the Headteacher and copy in the Chair of the school governors.   If you or the car were identifiable in any way from the photo (eg visible registration number, driver's face etc) I would very politely write that you resent the untrue suggestion that you had parked/had stopped/were waiting in a way that contravened any traffic regulations, and that you are sure that the school will understand that you would like an apology and a correction to be printed in the next newsletter.  (You can also clearly state that you were identifiable from the photo because other parents have mentioned it to you).   See if that works.   You don't want to go to court for defamation as you'll need access to about £10k in fees before you get out of bed.  You just want an apology and a correction.  If what you've told us is accurate, I don't see any reasonable school failing to say sorry.     *My wife is a former school governor and my experience listening to her is that very very few parents actually understand the meaning of the no stopping/no waiting signs and road markings outside schools.  Don't complain unless you are sure you weren't stopped where you shouldn't have been.
    • And they haven't offered a speed awareness course either?  (Have you done one in the last three years or is this in Scotland?)   And is one of the notices for 34 in a 30?  As Man in the Middle says, that ought to be below the level at which they take action.   (And sorry - I don't want to appear preachy - but...  there don't have to be any warnings or signs or lines on the road to advise you of the presence of speed cameras.  If you get away with an exceptional hardship argument you will need to stick to speed limits in future - whether you know there are cameras there or not.  NB Don't know if this applies to you, but most 30 mph limits are restricted roads with a system of streetlighting and don't even need speed limit signs - you are assumed to know this from the Highway Code).
    • It's up to you if you want to pay £300 you don't owe plus whatever Unicorn Food Tax with no basis in law whatsoever that they will have made up in the Letter Before Claim.   We'd prefer you didn't.   But you have received a LBC so it's make your mind up time.   So please    - post up photos of the signage in the dark that you'll have taken two months ago (post 14)    - post up details of planning permission for their signs you'll have found out after you got onto the council, again two months ago (again post 14)    - also let us know if you agree with Brassnecked's excellent letter or if you'd like to tweak bits depending on what you've found out    - upload the LBC.  Some of them are appallingly drafted and invariably contain Unicorn Food Tax which is all useful extra ammo    - also, where are you living now (post 35) and are you comfortable with legal communications arriving at your parents'?   If you look in our PPC Successes thread at the top of the page, you will see 275 times these cheats have been seen off with their tails between their legs (and all had the same "well known legal companies" (ho! ho!) on hand).  In reality 275 times is a massive underestimate, in all 275 cases there was a "moment of victory" IYSWIM where the PPC were thrashed in court or discontinued a claim or were called off by a supermarket chain, etc., etc.  There will have been at least that number again where they were told to Foxtrot Oscar and then crawled back under their stone.  They are eminently beatable but logically when you're in legal dispute you have to put some graft in to beat the other party.
  • Our picks

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


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2661 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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! :roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...