DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Private parking tickets
*****************************************************
#Post#: 107402--------------------------------------------------
Re: Who TF is ParkMaven
DIR By: DWMB2
Date: January 26, 2026, 9:07 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Have you received a Letter of Claim?
If not, the advice provide by jfollows on 16th January still
applies.
#Post#: 107414--------------------------------------------------
Re: Who TF is ParkMaven
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: January 26, 2026, 9:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Billy Butcher link ---
>
> Has anyone got any advice?..
>
--- End Quote ---
Wait for a letter of claim - ignore all debt collecting letters.
In the meantime, you could write a complaint to POPLA outlining
their assessors 'procedural error' in applying PoFA in a
situation where the requirements of PoFA weren't met. Their
response could help you if the matter were progressed.
#Post#: 107433--------------------------------------------------
Re: Who TF is ParkMaven
DIR By: ixxy
Date: January 26, 2026, 12:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: InterCity125 link ---
>
> In the meantime, you could write a complaint to POPLA
outlining their assessors 'procedural error' in applying PoFA in
a situation where the requirements of PoFA weren't met. Their
response could help you if the matter were progressed.
>
--- End Quote ---
You could but you'd probably be wasting your time. Even b789
intimated in their first post it was unlikely a POPLA assessor
would find in favour of the keeper based on that appeal. Have we
ever seen this avenue work with a PPC or second stage appeal?
Just sit tight and wait for the LOC.
#Post#: 107438--------------------------------------------------
Re: Who TF is ParkMaven
DIR By: InterCity125
Date: January 26, 2026, 1:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ixxy link ---
>
> [quote author=InterCity125 link=topic=8189.msg107414#msg107414
date=1769442242]
> In the meantime, you could write a complaint to POPLA
outlining their assessors 'procedural error' in applying PoFA in
a situation where the requirements of PoFA weren't met. Their
response could help you if the matter were progressed.
>
--- End Quote ---
You could but you'd probably be wasting your time. Even b789
intimated in their first post it was unlikely a POPLA assessor
would find in favour of the keeper based on that appeal. Have we
ever seen this avenue work with a PPC or second stage appeal?
Just sit tight and wait for the LOC.
[/quote]
It is always worth complaining.
Even though POPLA is a one stage appeal process, it would
definitely help a defendant's case if they could evidence that
their appeal had been mis-handled due to a procedural error.
We've seen this before when POPLA assessors have incorrectly
applied PoFA on non-relevant land - at the complaint stage POPLA
admitted that they'd screwed up - this legally scuppered the
operators chance of pursuing the matter to court as the POPLA
complaint response acknowledged that the airport land involved
was not relevant land and therefore the keeper could never be
held liable.
So effectively you can manipulate the system to make it a two
stage process if you know how to play it.
In this particular case, if the NtK didn't contain the required
wording then the matter is entirely objective in nature -
meaning; that the procedural error is clearly obvious.
In terms of PoFA Schedule 4 para. 9(2)(e) - the section not only
requires that the relevant information is provided to the keeper
but the information must be provided in a specific fashion -
namely; that the 9(2)(e) specified a generic wording followed by
the specific wording of 9(2)(e)(i) followed by the word "or"
followed by the specific wording of 9(2)(e)(ii) - this means
that collectively the keeper is advised of their legal position
and is then presented with a legal choice - a choice of either
paying the unpaid parking charges themself OR by nominating the
driver - if the required wording is not present (as appears the
case in this situation) then the keeper is never presented with
the legal choice which is specified in 9(2)(e) - the POPLA
assessor clearly misses this and this is a procedural error.
#Post#: 107927--------------------------------------------------
Re: Who TF is ParkMaven
DIR By: Billy Butcher
Date: January 29, 2026, 1:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Cheers for that lads really appreciated I’ll sit tight these
muppets won’t be getting a penny. Thanks again
*****************************************************
Page 5 of 5
DIR Previous Page