The motorist sent a brief appeal to POPLA stating their charges were unenforceable.
Highview rejected his appeal stating that it was a template. (Highview forgot to mention their own Parking Charge notice was also a template).
The motorist sent in a rather longer appeal to POPLA, but also stating that the charge was not a genuine pre-estimate of loss, and therefore unenforceable.
Highview stated that this was another template and if POPLA upheld the appeal all of their charges would be unenforceable.
"this is an entirely vexatious attempt to subvert the appeals process, and that [motorist] has no valid grounds for appeals. He has neglected to set out any genuine mitigation that have given us cause to reconsider this charge, and has instead resorted to sending a generic objection that would apply equally to all charges that we issue if it was given any credence in this case."POPLA upheld the appeal.
Highview are of course correct. The appeal grounds do indeed apply to all their charges and in fact to all charges to all parking companies issued under the guise of breach of contract. It is impossible to run a business solely on monies from breach of contract, because this can only put you back in the position you were. it cannot be used to generate a profit and run a business.
Both the DVLA and the BPA Ltd have currently stuck their fingers in their ears, chanting 'la la la' very loudly when anyone tries to point this out to them. The Prankster firmly believes that one day they will have to pull their fingers out and do something and confront the issue head-on.
Meanwhile, Highview Parking seem to have learned only one thing over the year and a bit that POPLA has been in force - not to threaten that they will be spurred into immediate further action if their appeal is turned down.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
Be helpful to the court. Put as many points as you can in your statement, but summarise what you can, ideally at the beginning of your statement.
ReplyDelete