NON-compliant NTK

emilycharlotte · 3 July 2017 at 12:28PM

I am posting on behalf of a friend who received a windscreen PCN on behalf of UKPS (Northwest) Ltd. The IPC operator badge on the windscreen PCN. He has waited for the NTK to come through the post (as advised on here). PCN was issued 26/04/17, NTK dated 29/06/17 BUT THE NTK STATES THAT UKPS WOULD ISSUE A POPLA CODE IF THE APPEAL IS UNSUCCESSFUL. When I have looked into UKPS I can see that they are IPC member, (not BPA) so they wouldn’t issue a POPLA code surely?
The company who have sent the NTK are TNC Parking Services- a debt recovery firm who are part of the BPA.
My question is then which template letter should I be using- the BPA or IPC?
Is there any merit in writing back to TNC/UKPS to tell them that the information in their NTK is wrong?
Thanks for any help

Coupon-mad · 4 July 2017 at 12:49AM

PCN was issued 26/04/17, NTK dated 29/06/17

Good, can't be a POFA one then, it's served too late...or have TNC suggested the keeper will be liable under the POFA after day 29 after the NTK was given?

I would submit an appeal asking for a POPLA code as promised on the NTK, and point out that the NTK was served too late for keeper liability. See what the keeper gets back in the rejection letter.

Looks like there is scope to complain to the DVLA about that misleading NTK. But I'd like to know if it also suggested keeper liability, at all?

emilycharlotte · 4 July 2017 at 10:03AM

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Good, can't be a POFA one then, it's served too late...or have TNC suggested the keeper will be liable under the POFA after day 29 after the NTK was given?

I would submit an appeal asking for a POPLA code as promised on the NTK, and point out that the NTK was served too late for keeper liability. See what the keeper gets back in the rejection letter.

Looks like there is scope to complain to the DVLA about that misleading NTK. But I'd like to know if it also suggested keeper liability, at all?

Thanks for your help. There is nothing at all about POFA.

The letter starts that TNC have obtained your details from the DVLA using a 'reasonable cause request' as the vehicle detailed above was issued a parking charge notice which was fixed to the vehicle.

Letter then goes on to ask for the driver's name, address etc.

States the signage is clearly displayed, that it is private land managed by UKPS.

Then says TNC do not accept appeals and appeals should be made to UKPS within 28 days from the date of letter.

Details of UKPS provided- then states if appeal is unsuccessful you will be provided with POPLA unique 10 digit code.

I will therefore write to UKPS with BPA letter requesting POPLA code and enclose the letter from TNC stating this.

If they aren't seeking to rely on POFA then I can't use the fact it's been served after the 28 days can I?

I have my fingers and toes crossed that they will send a POPLA code as I don't think my friend is likely to go along the IPC route unfortunately.

Thanks again for your help.

Umkomaas · 4 July 2017 at 10:46AM

If they aren't seeking to rely on POFA then I can't use the fact it's been served after the 28 days can I?

As long as they are not pursuing the keeper for the charge, they can take any amount of time to pursue the driver (although I don't think the DVLA will issue keeper details after 6 months from the date of the parking event).

UKPS (NW) have been IPC members since October 2013, so you definitely won't get a POPLA code, but it will be interesting to see their response to you reminding them that the NtK (issued by TNC) promises you a POPLA code.

Then it will be a case (as CM states above) of a formal complaint to the DVLA.

emilycharlotte · 5 July 2017 at 12:27PM

Umkomaas wrote: »

As long as they are not pursuing the keeper for the charge, they can take any amount of time to pursue the driver (although I don't think the DVLA will issue keeper details after 6 months from the date of the parking event).

UKPS (NW) have been IPC members since October 2013, so you definitely won't get a POPLA code, but it will be interesting to see their response to you reminding them that the NtK (issued by TNC) promises you a POPLA code.

Then it will be a case (as CM states above) of a formal complaint to the DVLA.

Thanks both...I have amended the letter as below.
Just a Q before I get my friend to send off- should I delete the part about the photographic evidence? Reason I have included this is because the ticket was from a hospital car park and my friend is convinced that photographs are forbidden in the hospital grounds (including car park) due to client confidentiality.

Just FYI- my friend is considering a letter to the landowner but wants to send the appeal to cover both bases.

Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No. ....................

I received the enclosed letter through the post from TNC Parking Services, a debt collection company presumably instructed by you.
I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car.

I believe that the signs in the car park fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs would not have been seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 and offer me a POPLA code (as suggested in TNC Parking Services letter), or cancel the charge. If you fail to cancel the charge and offer me a POPLA code when your representative has specifically stated I would receive one then I will make a formal complaint to the DVLA and the Information Commisioner.

There is no proof that my car was parked in the said car park on the said date.
If you are relying on POFA 2012 then please note that the Notice to Keeper has been received out of time.

Please note that should it be found that you obtained the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause I reserve the right to sue your company for a sum not less than £250 for any Data Protection Act breach.

Your aggressive business practice for a matter of a driver potentially using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me.

I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Umkomaas · 5 July 2017 at 1:15PM

Just a Q before I get my friend to send off- should I delete the part about the photographic evidence? Reason I have included this is because the ticket was from a hospital car park and my friend is convinced that photographs are forbidden in the hospital grounds (including car park) due to client confidentiality.

Leave it in. It either forces them to rebut it (and have to do some working in proving you wrong) or if they refuse to deal with it or ignore, it becomes something you could use against them in the unlikely event of a later court case.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 and offer me a POPLA code (as suggested in TNC Parking Services letter), or cancel the charge. If you fail to cancel the charge and offer me a POPLA code when your representative has specifically stated I would receive one then I will make a formal complaint to the DVLA and the Information Commisioner.

I would say 'as offered', makes it much more of an obligation on them to provide it.

emilycharlotte · 5 July 2017 at 2:15PM

Great, I've made those changes and will get my friend to send it to them via email. thanks for all your help!

emilycharlotte · 10 July 2017 at 2:08PM

Ok, I told my friend not to spend too much time on this but he is particularly annoyed and has come up with the below letter.

If you could let me know if you see any problems with this letter.

I am going to advise him to keep in the part about the photographic evidence and the part about signage, but can you see anything wrong with the below:
(thanks again for your help)

I write further to the letter from TNC Collections dated .................., a copy of which is attached for ease of reference.

I note that the alleged parking charge relates to ....................., when my vehicle was allegedly parked at the ................... at ............ without a valid permit on display.

Presumably, having not had a response from the driver to the PCN issued on .................., you are now seeking to pursue me as the registered keeper of the vehicle and presumably, seeking to rely on Schedule 4 Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, to establish “keeper liability”.

I understand, however, that under Schedule 4 Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, for that notice to be valid, and for you to be able to successfully establish “keeper liability”, that notice should have been sent to me within 56 days of the date of the alleged parking incident, which I calculate to have been on/by ...................., excluding ....................

In fact, the notice was received 66 days after the date of the alleged parking incident, so 10 days late, and as such is “out of time” and unenforceable.

Schedule 4 Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is very clear on this point.

See in particular Schedule 4 Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, paragraphs 6(1)(a) and 8.

Paragraph 6(1)(a) applies where a valid Notice to Driver has been left on the vehicle in question, followed by a Notice to Keeper “in accordance with paragraph 8 [of Schedule 4]”. Paragraph 8(4) to (6) provides:

(4)The notice must be given by—

(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or

(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period. [my emphasis]

(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given.

(6)A notice sent by post is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have been delivered (and so “given” for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4)) on the second working day after the day on which it is posted; and for this purpose “working day” means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday in England and Wales.

The alleged incident was on (date)......................

As per paragraph 8(5), that day is ignored when calculating the “relevant period”.

As per paragraph 8(5), “the relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given”, or in other words, 56 days from the date the Notice to Driver was supposedly given.

If we take (date) as “day 1”, “day 56” is (date).

The Notice to Keeper I was sent is clearly dated “(date)” (see attached).

The Notice to Keeper arrived Saturday (date), ie 10 days after the last day on which it should have been received by me.

Any liability to pay this parking noticed lapsed at midnight on (date).

As such, and as stated above, you have failed to establish “keeper liability” within the “relevant period”, as defined by Schedule 4.

I will therefore not be paying this fine. I will also not be paying any “additional fees” which you may seek to now apply to my account.

I am also under no legal obligation to provide you with any further information, including who may have been the driver on (date)

Instead, I expect written confirmation within the next 14 days that this is now the end of the matter.

Any further correspondence, unwarranted threats or demands for payment, will be seen as “harassment”, as per the decision in Ferguson v British Gas (2009) and will be met by formal complaints to the BPA, Credit Services Association and the Consumer Ombudsman, and I reserve my right to pursue my own claim for damages (and costs) in that respect.

In the event proceedings are issued when as stated above you have failed to establish “keeper liability” within the “relevant period”, then I will be asking the Court to strike out the claim and order that you/TNC Collections do pay me my costs, pursuant to CPR Rule 27.14(g), as to have issued the claim in such circumstances, will be “unreasonable behaviour” on your part.

In the event proceedings are issued , any claim will be vigorously defended and I reserve the right to refer this and any other relevant correspondence to the Court on the issue of costs.

Coupon-mad · 10 July 2017 at 2:28PM

excluding

Excluding what? It is 56 days straight, not excluding any days.

Yes he can send that, no harm done at all.

NON-compliant NTK

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free