Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


DragonFly1967

BPA AOS CoP V5 (October 2014)

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2073 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

Version 5 of the BPA Approved Operator Scheme Code of Practice has now been published.

 

Among smaller changes and tweaks, this removes the requirement for 'charges' to reflect a Genuine Pre-Estimate of Loss (I think you'd still win with this as a basis for defence in court) and replaces it with the words "Commercially Justified". Which is a giant can of worms if you ask me.

 

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/write/Documents/AOS_Code_of_Practice_October_2014_update_V5.pdf


Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great. I can't wait to see what the figures are when they have to provide evidence of their "commercial justification".

 

I think when anybody writes to one of his companies now, they ought to ask for evidence that the find that they are trying to levy is commercially justified as per their code of practice. This means that you would want complete costings and an account.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BPA Ltd can write what they like, but they cannot go against hundreds of years of common law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The BPA Ltd can write what they like, but they cannot go against hundreds of years of common law.

 

That's why I mentioned still using GPEOL as part of a defence in court (if it gets that far).

 

It will however, in my opinion, make it slightly more difficult to win at POPLA.


Please note that my posts are my opinion only and should not be taken as any kind of legal advice.
In fact, they're probably just waffling and can be quite safely and completely ignored as you wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anecessary move by the BPA to stop its members jumping ship. They know that they dont have a legal leg to stand on so they are trying to gull people into thinking that there is substance to their use of words.

Commercially justifiable penalties case law only has reference to written bilateral contracts so I can see this one ending up in a position like PE v Beavis in a fairly short time as there is nothing to support that argument (nor dispel it).

I dont think it is a smart move on their part but there again desperate measures are needed to keep the money flowing in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will not have any effect on POPLA as they are completely and utterly independent, and will continue with GPEOL as they have set this as standard. Now if you don't mind I shall get on with my breakfast, having sugar coated words. Might end up eating many more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...