The Prankster today received an email from a concerned motorist who thought he remembered that this was not always the case. The POPLA website used to contain a statement to the effect that if the appeal was upheld that any monies paid should be returned. Now that his memory is jogged, The Prankster seems to remember the same wording. Unfortunately, neither The Prankster's screen dumps nor The Wayback Machine captures have a copy of the missing text.
However, as The Motorist also points out, POPLA's old appeal forms do not mention this while the new ones do.
Original form.
The Prankster would therefore like to ask the following questions.
- When did the web site get changed?
- Who decided to change the policy?
- Were any motorist organisations consulted?
- Why was the change not publicised?
- Were the appeals withdrawn in June submitted before or after the policy change?
The Prankster will investigate further. If anyone has screen or site captures from the POPLA website, please get in touch.
If this turns out to be substantiated, The Prankster considers that this is further evidence of the non independence of POPLA; secretly changing a policy to the detriment of motorists due to pressure from the parking industry, without consulting any independent organisations, and implementing the change without publicity. How much worse can things get?
"Tie me Kangaroo down mate, tie me Kangaroo down"
ReplyDeletePOPLA = Kangaroo court
What do you expect? They are funded by The BPA, who are funded by The PPCs, who get their funds from motorists.
ReplyDeletea reply from POPLA on this matter
ReplyDeleteOnce an operator has received payment from a motorist, the operator is reasonably entitled to assume that the motorist has accepted liability for the charge and will close the case. This is common practice in both private parking and in the statutory field where this goes back more than 20 years. It is the basis of the general advice to ‘pay or challenge’.
If a motorist pays by mistake they must take this up with the operator. This, too, is established practice which has not changed.
Thanks Phil.
DeleteThe Prankster has no problem if this was the process from day one and was clearly communicated to all parties. The silent change of policy is where the problem lies. The number of motorists having their appeals withdrawn is testament to the fact that this has not been clearly communicated to the motorist.