Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 17th Jul 17, 2:46 PM
    • 14Posts
    • 4Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    NIMPS - Not in my parking space - Parker in wrong car park
    • #1
    • 17th Jul 17, 2:46 PM
    NIMPS - Not in my parking space - Parker in wrong car park 17th Jul 17 at 2:46 PM
    Hello,

    Got a parking ticket through the post on Saturday from NIMPS.co.uk or not in my parking space.com. The was no parking ticket issued on the car. They are a trading name of Startaq and are BPA registered but I cant find any information of anyone contesting the charges.

    Basically what it is there are 2 dentists next door to each other. I dropped my daughter off and waited in the car with my other daughter (who is disabled if that matters) , turns out the car park I was in was for the wrong dentist. So technically I was in the wrong. But of course I don't feel I should have to pay, but on what grounds can I appeal ? The signage seems o.k

    Cant appeal to the landowner I spoke the the dentist and they were very unhelpful even to the point of being rude. It even looks like it may have been them that took the photo. A bit of research show that they get £15 for every ticket that gets paid.

    Because the ticket was issued through the post do I still have to wait 26 days to appeal it ?

    Of course my first appeal letter would be refusing to name the driver would that be enough ?
Page 2
    • Fruitcake
    • By Fruitcake 27th Aug 17, 7:42 PM
    • 40,477 Posts
    • 80,859 Thanks
    Fruitcake
    O.k I have gone through the process. The complaints process online is seriously flawed as it only allows 1000 characters for your complaint. Managed to get an E-mail out of them and send the blue text verbatim without having to add any extra clauses.

    I have finally got my POPLA code. Where do we go from here
    Originally posted by rsb1965purple
    You make a PoPLA appeal.

    Use all the template appeal points from post 3 of the NEWBIES that are relevant to your case. In addition, add that the signs are forbidding. Do a search of the parking ticket forum, selecting show posts, using the keywords forbidding signs to find ones you can crib.
    Go back through this thread and make a note of all the points other posters have commented upon, and make sure you include all of those.

    Post your draft for the regulars to check here before submitting it.

    What happened when you complained to the DVLA about the misleading signs as previously suggested in post 11?
    Last edited by Fruitcake; 27-08-2017 at 7:45 PM.
    I married my cousin. I had to...
    I don't have a sister.

    All my screwdrivers are cordless.
    "You're Safety Is My Primary Concern Dear" - Laks
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 27th Aug 17, 7:48 PM
    • 15,510 Posts
    • 24,233 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    I have finally got my POPLA code. Where do we go from here
    NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #3 and the last few pages of the POPLA Decisions sticky.

    Post your draft appeal here for critique and fine tuning before submitting. Don't mss your POPLA deadline.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 4th Sep 17, 1:29 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    Send a copy of that sign to the DVLA. They have ruled that the phrase "and application will be made" is incorrect and misleading. Ask that the DVLA auditors visit StarTraq.
    Do you have any sources for this that I can quote I cant find anything on google ?
    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 4th Sep 17, 4:02 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    To Whom it may concern

    As the registered!keeper!of the above vehicle, I wish to appeal the PCN issued by Startaq Ltd. I would like to have the PCN cancelled based on the following grounds:

    1. SIGNAGE
    2. BPA CODE OF PRACTICE, NON COMPLIANCE TO GUIDELINES
    3. THE OPERATOR HAS NOT SHOWN THAT THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IT IS PURSUING IS IN FACT THE DRIVER WHO MAY HAVE BEEN POTENTIALLY LIABLE FOR THE CHARGE.
    4. LAND OWNER AUTHORITY
    5. GRACE PERIOD
    6. NO EVIDENCE OF PERIOD PARKED

    1. Signage

    I got nothing on this need some help

    2. BPA CODE OF PRACTICE - NON-COMPLIANCE TO GUIDELINES

    The BPA Code of Practice point 20.5a stipulates that: "When issuing a parking charge notice you may use photographs as evidence that a vehicle was parked in an unauthorised way. The photographs must refer to and confirm the incident which you claim was unauthorised. A date and time stamp should be included on the photograph. All photographs used for evidence should be clear and legible and must not be retouched or digitally altered." The parking charge notice in question contains one photograph hey do they clearly show the vehicle but do not included any date and time stamp upon them. The images may have also been cropped and I invite ECP to produce evidence of the original "un-cropped" images showing the vehicle.

    3. The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge

    In cases with a!keeper!appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper!liability' to rely upon, POPLA must first consider whether they are confident that the Assessor knows who the driver is, based on the evidence received. No presumption can be made about!liability!whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person.!

    In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay. I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be), and as there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, it has been held by POPLA on numerous occasions, that a parking charge cannot be enforced against a!keeper!without a valid NTK.

    As the!keeper!of the vehicle, it is my right to choose not to name the driver, yet still not be lawfully held liable if an operator is not using or complying with Schedule 4. This applies regardless of when the first appeal was made and regardless of whether a purported 'NTK' was served or not, because the fact remains I am only appealing as the!keeper!and ONLY Schedule 4 of the POFA (or evidence of who was driving) can cause a!keeper!appellant to be deemed to be the liable party.

    The burden of proof rests with the Operator to show that (as an individual) I have personally not complied with terms in place on the land and show that I am personally liable for their parking charge. They cannot.

    Furthermore, the vital matter of full compliance with the POFA was confirmed by parking law expert barrister, Henry Greenslade, the previous POPLA Lead Adjudicator, in 2015:

    Understanding!keeper!liability
    “There appears to be continuing misunderstanding about Schedule 4. Provided certain conditions are strictly complied with, it provides for recovery of unpaid parking charges from the!keeper!of the vehicle.!

    There is no ‘reasonable presumption’ in law that the registered!keeper!of a vehicle is the driver. Operators should never suggest anything of the sort. Further, a failure by the recipient of a notice issued under Schedule 4 to name the driver, does not of itself mean that the recipient has accepted that they were the driver at the material time. Unlike, for example, a Notice of Intended Prosecution where details of the driver of a vehicle must be supplied when requested by the police, pursuant to Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a!keeper!sent a Schedule 4 notice has no legal obligation to name the driver. If {POFA 2012 Schedule 4 is} not complied with then!keeper!liability!does not generally pass.''

    Therefore, no lawful right exists to pursue unpaid parking charges from myself as!keeper!of the vehicle, where an operator cannot transfer the!liability!for the charge using the POFA.!

    This exact finding was made in 6061796103 against ParkingEye in September 2016, where POPLA Assessor Carly Law found:!
    ''I note the operator advises that it is not attempting to transfer the!liability!for the charge using the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and so in mind, the operator continues to hold the driver responsible. As such, I must first consider whether I am confident that I know who the driver is, based on the evidence received. After considering the evidence, I am unable to confirm that the appellant is in fact the driver. As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is the driver and therefore liable for the charge. As I am allowing the appeal on this basis, I do not need to consider the other grounds of appeal raised by the appellant. Accordingly, I must allow this appeal.''

    4.NO EVIDENCE OF LANDOWNER AUTHORITY!
    - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice

    As this operator does not have proprietary interest in the land then I require that they produce an unredacted copy of the contract with the landowner. The contract and any 'site agreement' or 'User Manual' setting out details including exemptions - such as any 'genuine customer' or 'genuine resident' exemptions or any site occupier's 'right of veto' charge cancellation rights - is key evidence to define what this operator is authorised to do and any circumstances where the landowner/firms on site in fact have a right to cancellation of a charge. It cannot be assumed, just because an agent is contracted to merely put some signs up and issue Parking Charge Notices, that the agent is also authorised to make contracts with all or any category of visiting drivers and/or to enforce the charge in court in their own name (legal action regarding land use disputes generally being a matter for a landowner only).

    Witness statements are not sound evidence of the above, often being pre-signed, generic documents not even identifying the case in hand or even the site rules. A witness statement might in some cases be accepted by POPLA but in this case I suggest it is unlikely to sufficiently evidence the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.!

    Nor would it define vital information such as charging days/times, any exemption clauses, grace periods (which I believe may be longer than the bare minimum times set out in the BPA CoP) and basic information such as the land boundary and bays where enforcement applies/does not apply. Not forgetting evidence of the various restrictions which the landowner has authorised can give rise to a charge and of course, how much the landowner authorises this agent to charge (which cannot be assumed to be the sum in small print on a sign because template private parking terms and sums have been known not to match the actual landowner agreement).!

    Paragraph 7 of the BPA CoP defines the mandatory requirements and I put this operator to strict proof of full compliance:

    7.2 If the operator wishes to take legal action on any outstanding parking charges, they must ensure that they have the written authority of the landowner (or their appointed agent) prior to legal action being taken.

    7.3 The written authorisation must also set out:

    a) the definition of the land on which you may operate, so that the boundaries of the land can be clearly defined

    b) any conditions or restrictions on parking control and enforcement operations, including any restrictions on hours of operation

    c) any conditions or restrictions on the types of vehicles that may, or may not, be subject to parking control and enforcement
    d) who has the responsibility for putting up and maintaining signs
    e) the definition of the services provided by each party to the agreement.

    5. GRACE PERIOD

    As per section 13 of the BPA Code of Practice: 'You should allow the driver a reasonable 'grace period' in which to decide if they are going to stay or go. If the driver is on your land without permission, you should still allow them a grace period to read your signs and leave before you take enforcement action.' Therefore, if a driver stops for a short period of time to read a sign, they must have the opportunity to leave and not accept the terms of an alleged contract.

    The total time spent by the car past the point of ANPR control is NOT the same as the period parked. It is also true that waiting in a queue for a petrol pump to become free, filling up your vehicle, using the toilet, browsing the shop and paying for goods is time included and recorded on the ANPR and not actual time a vehicle is parked in the separate car park in the spaces provided.

    Kelvin Reynolds, Head of Public Affairs and Policy at the British Parking Association (BPA) says there is a difference between ‘grace’ periods and ‘observation’ periods in parking and that good practice allows for this.

    “An observation period is the time when an enforcement officer should be able to determine what the motorist intends to do once in the car park. The BPA’s guidance specifically says that there must be sufficient time for the motorist to park their car, observe the signs, decide whether they want to comply with the operator’s conditions and either drive away or pay for a ticket,” he explains.

    “No time limit is specified. This is because it might take one person five minutes, but another person 10 minutes depending on various factors, not limited to disability.”

    The BPA’s guidance defines the ‘grace period’ as the time allowed after permitted or paid-for parking has expired but before any kind of enforcement takes place.

    Kelvin continues: “In the instance of a PCN being issued while a ticket is being purchased, the operator has clearly not given the motorist sufficient time to read the signs and comply as per the operator’s own rules. If a motorist decides they do not want to comply and leaves the car park, then a reasonable period of time should be provided also.”

    6. NO EVIDENCE OF PERIOD PARKED.!

    The Notice to!keeper!clearly states the vehicle was parked during the relevant period. PoFA2012 Sched 4 Para 9 refers at numerous times to the period of parking. By virtue of the nature of an ANPR system recording only entry and exit times, ECP are not able to definitively state the period of parking. Contrary to the mandatory provisions of the BPA code of practice, there is no record to show that the vehicle was parked longer than the time allowed PLUS the mandatory grace periods. These are a minimum of 10 minutes to leave the car park and a similar period to cover the period after the vehicle parks, finds signage, reads the signage and decides whether to accept or reject the terms offered within. The alleged overstay does not meet the binding code of practice. There is no evidence that the vehicle was ‘parked’ for the period stated.

    Yours Sincerely
    x

    Need a little help with the signage part and any other points you think I should bring up.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 4th Sep 17, 11:52 PM
    • 51,522 Posts
    • 65,134 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Do you have any sources for this that I can quote I cant find anything on google ?
    Originally posted by rsb1965purple
    I think the source is the BMPA, and you can be sure it is true if IamEmanresu says so.

    Your POPLA draft needs you to check it for silly errors, such as naming the wrong firm!:

    The parking charge notice in question contains one photograph hey do they clearly show the vehicle but do not included any date and time stamp upon them. The images may have also been cropped and I invite ECP to produce evidence

    And re this:

    1. Signage

    I got nothing on this need some help
    Why? The unclear signs template is in the NEWBIES thread post #3.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 5th Sep 17, 10:34 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    Erm...... photo has me parked right infront of it.
    • DoaM
    • By DoaM 5th Sep 17, 11:20 AM
    • 3,494 Posts
    • 3,551 Thanks
    DoaM
    So? Unclear signage doesn't just mean it couldn't be seen!

    * What about the font size? Can all the signage terms be easily read?
    * Is the charge amount clearly described in the largest font on the sign?
    * Are all relevant terms that the PCN relies on covered by the signage?
    * Etc.
    Diary of a madman
    Walk the line again today
    Entries of confusion
    Dear diary, I'm here to stay
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 5th Sep 17, 11:46 AM
    • 15,510 Posts
    • 24,233 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    Check out the type of signage the Supreme Court Judges said met their judgement of what a 'clear' sign was, especially in relation to the 'penalty' charge, so the motorist was in no doubt what the cost of any transgression would be. Barry Beavis v ParkingEye is the case you need to refer to.

    Just put 'Beavis signage' into Google and the first image you see is the one the Judges commented on. How does 'your' sign match up?
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 5th Sep 17, 5:59 PM
    • 51,522 Posts
    • 65,134 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Erm...... photo has me parked right infront of it.
    Originally posted by rsb1965purple
    Errmmm...are you saying that the £100 is in bold; the largest letters as a stand-out term?

    You also have ECP wrongly named, again, in point #6.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 6th Sep 17, 5:22 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    Yeh, spotted that thankyou for seeing that. Thats copy/pasting and skim reading for you.

    Yes £100 is in bold and whilst not the largest on the sign is very large see signage example here,
    hxxps://notinmyparkingspace.com/
    I seriously cant find anything that I can argue with on signage should I just leave it out altoghter or is my best point. I found a couple of other points to add in though on the end by scouring the code of conduct.

    7. Third Party Ticketing.

    Under section 15.1 of the BPA code of practice, Startraq PLC are providing a self ticketing service. Its needs to be proven that both the person taking the photograph and the person issuing the ticket, who may well be two seperate people have provided an up to date signed copy of the BPA code of practice.

    8. BPA CODE OF PRACTICE – Financial Incentives

    Under Section 9.4 of the BPA code of practice, the practice of offering financial incentives to AOS parking attendants/wardens should be prohibited. Startraq PLC offer a £15 incentive for each ticket issued by the third party, whom are acting on their behalf as a parking attendant/warden.
    Last edited by rsb1965purple; 06-09-2017 at 5:33 PM.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 7th Sep 17, 1:19 AM
    • 51,522 Posts
    • 65,134 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    That's all good.

    I would have a signage point that says any signs are prohibiting parking, not offering it. And since the tarmac was not marked as a 'no stopping zone' (it was not marked at all) the driver did not reasonably expect the terms on the sparse signs could apply to a momentary stop whilst the driver remained in the car, dropping off a child(?) to the dentist.*

    Dropping off a young female passenger who needed to be safely delivered to premises, is not parking. Nor did the driver see any entrance sign at this location to suggest this was 'managed private land' as required under the BPA CoP. Therefore no agreement on the charge was reached and there was no 'parking' event or breach or acceptance of any charge, for what any competent driver would understand was 'boarding/alighting' of a passenger; an exemption when on street or in Council car parks.

    With no markings on the tarmac to indicate otherwise, and no signs seen because it was a fact that the driver had no cause to step outside of the car in the brief time alleged, it is reasonable for a driver to believe that the normal rules apply and dropping off/picking up passengers in a brief few minutes cannot be treated the same as a driver who parks and leaves the car, more than momentarily.



    Don't say which dentist!
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 7th Sep 17, 4:47 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    O.k Brilliant . Thankyou everyone for all your help I think I have the letter ready to submit to popla

    One last thing, when I go to Popla its gives me a choice of what grounds do I wish to appeal. I'm leaning towards the option, I was not improperly parked. Rather than Other grounds. Mostly due to the wording that they have on the site suggesting that other grounds are less likley to be succesful.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 7th Sep 17, 8:45 PM
    • 51,522 Posts
    • 65,134 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    I was not improperly parked.
    Never choose an option that implies/says who parked.

    Choose 'OTHER' as the NEWBIES thread post #3 tells you.

    Mostly due to the wording that they have on the site suggesting that other grounds are less likley to be succesful.
    They lie; we always use other and are 99% successful.

    Guess who wrote that 'other' was less likely to be successful, and guess WHEN that first appeared on the POPLA website? Well, the smart money is on the BPA who steered and advised this service of POPLA, and yep, you guessed it, those words were there from the outset, weeks before this POPLA service EVER looked at a single case.

    We know what we are doing !
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 23rd Sep 17, 11:49 AM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    O.k I have had a reply to my POPLA appeal. They appear to have rebutted all my claims providing evidence of a stay over 11mins etc.

    StarTraq don't currently have electronic access to the DVLA as we have made less than 300 requests, because of this, we issue non POFA notice to keepers. We don't issue notices to drivers as we don't know the drivers details at the time of the incident. xxxxxxxx referencing POFA legislation has no bearing on this notice as we have issed a non POFA notice
    The only thing I have is that ,as they issue less than 300 requests to DVLA ,it was issued as "non-POFA notice". Am I right in thinking that is a major own goal on their part ? Provided the driver is not named it is not enforceable. The registered keeper of the car, cannot drive, is not on the insurance of the car in question, only holds a very old (paper version) provisional license issued approx 30 years ago, and infact wasnt in the car at the time of the incident. But how do I prove that.
    Last edited by rsb1965purple; 23-09-2017 at 12:28 PM.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 23rd Sep 17, 12:07 PM
    • 33,248 Posts
    • 17,191 Thanks
    Quentin
    You don't need to prove it.

    Now popla failed you ignore everything except court correspondence or a letter before court action
    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 23rd Sep 17, 12:18 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    Sorry POPLA hasnt failed --- yet. This is Startraqs reply to my letter, it gives me 7 days to reply to evidence they have submitted.

    Should I reply and re-enforce the fact that they say the ticket is non-POFA. Although I am not 100% sure about this, if they have complied with all the other elements of POFA could this not be upheld in court? From what I have read I cant make sense of it.

    Or do I hold my nerve and rely on what I submitted and not reply.
    • Umkomaas
    • By Umkomaas 23rd Sep 17, 1:07 PM
    • 15,510 Posts
    • 24,233 Thanks
    Umkomaas
    You go through their evidence pack and you rebut anything in it that you disagree with, or is not quite correct, or is plain wrong. If you don't rebut a point they make, POPLA can take it that you agree with it.

    On your PoFA query, if it's not compliant on one point, it's not compliant - period. Given that they have said this:
    because of this, we issue non POFA notice to keepers. We don't issue notices to drivers as we don't know the drivers details at the time of the incident. xxxxxxxx referencing POFA legislation has no bearing on this notice as we have issed a non POFA notice
    Boom, slam dunk. No PoFA compliance, no Keeper liability. They know by their own admission that the keeper isn't liable. So provided you do not identify the driver, that should be then end of it when POPLA uphold your appeal.

    Make sure you focus in on their admission and drive it home to POPLA. If you're struggling with wording on this bit, flash up your draft for comment/fine tuning.
    We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

    Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 23rd Sep 17, 2:20 PM
    • 51,522 Posts
    • 65,134 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Should I reply and re-enforce the fact that they say the ticket is non-POFA.
    Yes - that wins, a slam-dunk!

    Although I am not 100% sure about this, if they have complied with all the other elements of POFA could this not be upheld in court?
    Nope. You win!
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

    • rsb1965purple
    • By rsb1965purple 23rd Sep 17, 8:22 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 4 Thanks
    rsb1965purple
    How this,

    I would like to draw it to the assessors attention that the operator (Startraq Ltd) have admitted that the PCN issued was non-PoFA compliant and therefore cannot hold the registered keeper liable. Again I re-enforce the first two paragraphs of section 3 of my appeal.

    3. In cases with a keeper appellant, yet no POFA 'keeper liability' to rely upon, POPLA must first consider whether they are confident that the Assessor knows who the driver is, based on the evidence received. No presumption can be made about liability whatsoever. A vehicle can be driven by any person (with the consent of the owner) as long as the driver is insured. There is no dispute that the driver was entitled to drive the car and I can confirm that they were, but I am exercising my right not to name that person.!

    In this case, no other party apart from an evidenced driver can be told to pay. I am the appellant throughout (as I am entitled to be), and as there has been no admission regarding who was driving, and no evidence has been produced, it has been held by POPLA on numerous occasions, that a parking charge cannot be enforced against a!keeper!without a valid NTK.


    I would also like to draw it to your attention that the photographs attached do not contain Date/Time stamps upon them. META data contained on the photographs can easily be edited in a matter of minutes using tools freely available over the internet and therefore cannot be relied upon.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 24th Sep 17, 1:48 AM
    • 51,522 Posts
    • 65,134 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    Yes that will do.
    PRIVATE PCN? DON'T PAY BUT DO NOT IGNORE IT TWO Clicks needed for advice:
    Top of the page: Home>>Forums>Household & Travel>Motoring>Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking - read the 'NEWBIES' FAQS thread!
    Advice to ignore is WRONG, unless in Scotland/NI.

Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

5,205Posts Today

6,369Users online

Martin's Twitter