This case was a blatant example of a parking operator trying to pressure someone into paying when their case held absolutely no water whatsoever.
Their case was basically, "We think that there was a contravention but we don't know what it was but we expect you to pay up regardless".
I strongly suspect that there are unofficial 'back-channels' between POPLA / IAS and the parking operators where the appeals people can 'indicate' to an operator when their case is best dropped - this probably means it doesn't go on the figures.
