Show Posts - Jogon

Well predictably Popla refused the appeal, would you like to see it here?  and whats next?I ran their reply:Short answer: it very likely is AI-generated (or at least heavily AI-assisted) — though you can’t prove it with 100% certainty.____How they summarised my appeal:The parking operator has issued a parking charge notice due to parked or waiting in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a disabled badge.Assessor summary of your caseThe appellant has raised the following points from their grounds of appeal: • They, as the registered keeper, were not present and are not required to identify the driver. • The badge was visible at ground level, even if not visible to an elevated camera. • The signage requirement does not override the duty to make reasonable adjustments. • The PCN was issued without considering disabled access needs, breaching the Equality Act 2010. • The camera evidence cannot prove the badge was not displayed, only that it was not visible from that angle. • The operator has not identified the driver. • They are not required to name the driver as the registered keeper. • The operator must fully comply with Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 to transfer liability. • The Notice to Keeper does not meet all mandatory POFA requirements. After reviewing the parking operator’s evidence, the appellant expands on their grounds of appeal. The appellant has provided a copy of the Blue Badge as evidence to support their appeal. The above evidence will be considered in making my decisionPOPLA is a single stage appeal service, we are impartial and independent of the sector. We consider the evidence provided by both parties to assess whether the PCN has been issued correctly by the parking operator and to determine if the driver has complied with the terms and conditions for the use of the car park or site. Our remit only extends to allowing or refusing an appeal. The terms and conditions of the car park state vehicles parked, stopped or waiting in marked disabled bays must display a valid disabled badge face up inside the front windscreen at all times. Breach any of the terms and conditions a £100 PCN will be issued. The parking operator has provided images of the vehicle parked in a disabled bay without a valid Blue Badge. The appellant explains the badge was visible at ground level, even if not visible to an elevated camera. The signage requirement does not override the duty to make reasonable adjustments. They did not need to provide additional proof of disability beyond the Blue Badge. The PCN was issued without considering disabled access needs, breaching the Equality Act 2010. The camera evidence cannot prove the badge was not displayed, only that it was not visible from that angle. I acknowledge the appellant’s comments, and I note they have advised the driver displayed the Blue Badge on the front seat due to the driver’s mobility issues. The principles of the Equality Act 2010 are to treat people who are recognised as have a disability equally with those who do not. Whilst I appreciate the appellant’s points, when the parking operator issued the PCN, it would not have been aware that the driver had a disability. The parking operator has issued the PCN as the driver failed to display a valid Blue Badge in the windscreen in accordance with the terms and conditions. As such, the parking operator would issue a PCN to any vehicle in breach of the terms What actions a parking operator takes thereafter is solely at the discretion of the parking operator. Therefore, if the appellant considers the parking operator has not made a reasonable adjustment, the appellant may wish to raise this with the parking operator directly. The appellant states the operator has not identified the driver. They are not required to name the driver as the registered keeper. The operator must fully comply with Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 to transfer liability. The Notice to Keeper does not meet all mandatory POFA requirements. The appellant has identified as the keeper of the vehicle on the day of the parking event. As such, I am considering the appellant’s liability for the PCN, as the keeper. For an operator to transfer liability of unpaid parking charges from the driver of the vehicle to the registered keeper of the vehicle, the regulations laid out in the Protection of Freedoms Act (PoFA) 2012 must be adhered to. Having viewed the notice to keeper issued to the appellant I am satisfied that the operator has complied with Schedule 4 paragraph 9 of PoFA 2012, and that liability of the parking charge was successfully transferred to the keeper at the time of the event. I note the appellant has referred to section 8.1.1 (d) of the Single Code. However, I am satisfied the Notice to Keeper is fully compliant with the requirements of PoFA 2012 and therefore has correctly transferred liability of the PCN to the registered keeper. I appreciate the appellant’s comments regarding the Appeals Charter. Section F.3 of the Code lists specific circumstances where a parking operator must reduce a PCN to £20, subject to appropriate evidence being provided. Under paragraph e of the code it explains where a Blue Badge has not been displayed but the holder of the Blue Badge supplies a copy of the Blue Badge they hold, that would have been valid at the time and in the circumstances identified in the notice. In this case, the appeal did not raise the driver was a Blue Badge holder, therefore there was no requirement for the parking operator to request evidence or reduce the PCN to £20. Whilst I note the appellant has provided a copy of the Blue Badge, this was not provided to the parking operator, therefore the operator could not take the evidence into consideration at the initial appeals stage. Ultimately, when parking on private land it is the responsibility of the motorist to comply with the terms and conditions displayed on the signs. After considering the evidence from both parties, the driver parked in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a disabled badge and therefore did not comply with the terms and conditions of the site. As such, I am satisfied the parking charge has been issued correctly and I must refuse the appeal. Any questions relating to payment of the parking charge should be directed to the operator.

I've submitted the response, one would hope those highly trained individuals at Popla will make the right decision and then again, Pigs might fly.Thankyou b789 thus far, your advice and help is as ever much appreciated,

Hi, you sure you have this right?The incident was in McDonalds in a suburb of Birmingham?

Here is Met Parkings contrived reply in Popla.  In the appeal to POPLA Mrs ***** claims that the driver is a disabled badge holder and had displayed the badge on the seat because they were unable to display it in the front windscreen due to mobility issues. She adds that we cannot hold her liable as the registered keeper as we have not met PoFA requirements. Whilst we note Mrs ***** comments regarding the driver’s mobility issues, we do not believe that placing the badge on the passenger seat is a viable alternative to displaying it in the front windscreen. Should the driver have found they were unable to lift the badge to a sufficient height to place it on the dashboard, they should have spoken to a member of staff and requested assistance in placing the Blue Badge in accordance with the terms and conditions or as an alternative they could have shown the badge to a manager and requested a temporary exemption from the requirement to display their badge in the front windscreen. It’s unclear why the driver failed to request such assistance or adjustments whilst they were on site. In this instance, Mrs ***** has simply stated reasonable adjustments should be made without them having actually been requested when the driver was on site, despite the fact that they were available to request. We are confident that we have considered the appeal under all current regulations. Regarding the Appeals Charter, we do not believe this would qualify as: • F.3(e) – at no point during the initial appeal process was it claimed that the driver was a disabled badge holder. If an appellant does not raise any qualifying circumstances, then there is no cause for us to request supporting evidence or consider the appeal under the Appeals Charter. We would also point out that it is entirely possible that the disabled badge provided does not belong to the driver, given Mrs ***** refusal to name the driver and the fact that only the front of the badge has been provided. • F.3(g) – exemption from the terms and is not guaranteed and is at the discretion of the manager on duty at the time of request. As we have not been provided with the name and address of the driver of the vehicle, we are pursuing the registered keeper under Schedule 4 of The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Please see our compliant Notice to Keeper in Section B of our evidence pack. Please also see a full explanation of why we may pursue the registered keeper under Schedule 4 of PoFA 2012 in Section C of our evidence pack. To summarise, the terms and conditions of parking are clearly stated on the signs that are prominently displayed at the entrance to and around the car park. These include vehicles parked, stopped or waiting in marked disabled bays must display a valid disabled badge face up inside the front windscreen at all times. Please note that these terms and conditions apply to all users of the car park, which naturally includes customers of the restaurant. As the photographic evidence provided in Section E of our evidence pack demonstrates, the vehicle remained in a disabled bay without a disabled badge clearly displayed in the front windscreen of the vehicle. It remains the driver’s responsibility to check the signs where they park and comply with the stated terms and conditions. In light of the above we believe the charge notice was issued correctly and the appeal should be refused.They want me reply within 7 days, engaging in Met Parking ridiculous stupidity achieves nothing, Popla will disregard anything a member of the public says anyway.   Or should I counter their points? I don’t believe there is anything more that can be added to the initial appeal.

Is this not the Popla appeal, they’ve provided a Popla code on the last letter, giving me 28 days from the date of the letter which was the 22nd of Oct (can upload it again if required)Also, no problem with the badge,should I consider blanking out the some of the digits on the badge just in case they have the abilty to snoop on badges?

I’m not the badge holder, it’s my partner, they have always put it on the seat due to restrictions in mobility at time, also accompanied with a steering aid.Does this work?POPLA Appeal – PCN [bla bla]Vehicle Registration: [bla bla]Operator: MET Parking ServicesAppellant: Registered Keeper1: A Valid Blue Badge Was Displayed – MET’s Camera Could Not See ItA valid Blue Badge was displayed by the driver, who is the legitimate badge holder. I, as the registered keeper, was not present and am not required to identify the driver.The badge was placed on the front passenger seat, where it is flat, stable, and visible from normal ground-level inspection. While the site signage states it must be in the windscreen, this does not override the duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled drivers. Placing it on the seat was necessary due to the driver’s mobility needs.The Blue Badge itself proves the driver is disabled, and MET cannot challenge this or require additional evidence. Issuing a PCN without considering the practical display needs of a disabled driver is a failure to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010.MET’s evidence relies solely on an elevated, forward-facing camera, which cannot see the seat. Its absence from that view does not prove the badge was not displayed.2. MET Has Not Met POFA Requirements to Transfer Liability to the KeeperMET has not identified the driver. As the registered keeper, I am not obliged to provide this information.To transfer liability from the driver to the keeper, MET must fully comply with Schedule 4 of POFA 2012.I assert their Notice to Keeper does not meet all mandatory requirements. Without full compliance, the keeper cannot be held liable.ConclusionThe Blue Badge was displayed by the disabled driver.MET’s elevated camera could not see it.The badge was displayed in a reasonable position due to the driver’s disability.MET failed to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act.POFA has not been satisfied, so keeper liability does not apply.I respectfully request that POPLA allow the appeal.Signed___Or I could add a condensed version if applicable?POPLA Appeal – PCN [bla bla ]Vehicle Registration: [bla bla]Operator: MET Parking ServicesAppellant: Registered KeeperA valid Blue Badge was displayed by the driver, who is the legitimate badge holder. I, as the registered keeper, was not present and am not required to identify the driver.The badge was placed on the front passenger seat, visible from normal ground-level inspection. While the signs state it must be in the windscreen, this does not override the duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled drivers. Placing it on the seat was necessary due to the driver’s mobility needs.MET’s evidence relies solely on an elevated, forward-facing camera, which cannot see the seat. Its absence from that view does not prove the badge was not displayed.MET has failed to consider reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010. They have also not fully complied with POFA to transfer liability to the keeper.For these reasons, I respectfully request that POPLA allow the appeal.Signed?

Im running out of time here I think, 22nd Oct they sent the Popla code if I want to appeak.Just to reiterate, they sent the notice to me the registered keeper, but not the driver, no driver name has been given/offered.The disabled badge was on the seat as it always is, not viewble on the photos they supplied which were 4 photos 20 seconds apart in each instance Driver has been to the branch since, they were not interested even with the badge in hand.Sign is next to the vehicle (see on in the photo, not sure on its wording as yet.Not mentioned the badge at this point but guess i should in the popla appealDon't think there is much more I can add

Just a final update to this particular one.The missing blips were pivotal to them having to cancel the ticket (thanks of course to the input within this thread)After cancelling their ticket as a 'gesture of goodwill' (interpreted as they were in the wrong). I was back there today, July was the issue, since then they have resurfaced that part of the road, at a later date they repainted the double yellow lines and in the past month they have no added the blips.   I wonder how many others have paid the fine at this particular location?  I guess the local authority won't be making any refunds.Here are the blips

I'll go back to the that branch over the weekend and take another look but from memory it's not that prominent the sign, the badge was as always on the front seat, It's never placed in the window.I'll upload the sign/location when next photographed,

Here is their letter with the Popla verification code.

Hello, predictably they have replied and have provided a Popla code, shall I upload the letter here (but blank out the Popla code). they sent it 12 days ago and stated I had 28 days to appeal to Popla

Thankyou, Ill do just that.No mention of the badge on the seat?   They will know from the photos if they recorded the info prior and after their photos that the NTK and the driver by way of gender were not 1 & the same.

Parked in a family pool car at McDonalds in a disabled bay, placed badge on seat as always do, bought a meal (receipt retained) and left 12 mins later.  Sat with my meal by the window in full view of the car.A week or so later the enclosed Notice to Keeper ticket turns up, I’ve had a look at the online photos and it is just 4 photos all the same as the on on the notice, just different time stamps, approx 20 secs apart, 21:50 - 21:51:20 - 21:51:40 & 21:52.  ( I was served at 21:54:!4)Have since taken a photo of the signage, both are enclosed.Not sure why their wording ‘apparent’ is used, but as such no enforcement officer of any kind was in attendance.Have been back to the branch with the car, with the ticket and with the badge, they simply said ‘email MET parking’ which is not how it worksNo drivers details has been given, no appeal notice as yet filled in.  How do I approach this?(just as an aside, it’s actually a bit embarrassing knowing they’re filming the car, part of the disability is bag for fluids which has to be manoeuvred / becomes visible  a little when getting out of a car, not sure Im happy with them remotely taking photographs of the car etc.

I have now heard back from the Council re my appealing the alleged contravention.The letter is enclosed, what I will add to the letter is that the kerb markings were not faded as they simply were not there as my initial photos showed.  Further to that and before I lodged this appeal after having my first one refused the lines had been freshly repainted but the blips again were not in attendance.  I’ll have to check them in the next week or so to see if they do add them.Thankyou again to those giving their advice, which without I would have struggled I’m sure.Again, Thankyou!

Now added and sent.Thankyou to those commenting in this post, I’ll update just as soon as I hear back from the Council.