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
    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 22nd Sep 17, 5:44 PM
    • 16Posts
    • 6Thanks
    AJP01
    PSN - Potentially big trouble
    • #1
    • 22nd Sep 17, 5:44 PM
    PSN - Potentially big trouble 22nd Sep 17 at 5:44 PM
    Hi All,
    Before any replies mentions the *2 newbie thread, i have already read it through it however i am looking for a more personal response.

    The Situation: For the past year my car has been parking down the side street next to the gym where there is a wider open space My vehicle is parked from midnight for roughly an hour and half, up until this point It was not known that parking here was unauthorised and had not received any parking notices, however on the 21/09/2017 I received 2 Parking charge notices for the 30th/31st of august 2017 from parking collection services (Other trading name Debt recovery plus) for "unauthorised parking" for the times midnight to1:30am where my vehicle was caught by APNR. with the standard letter of a discounted price of £60 or £100 after 14 days. I have recently seen the sign on the back of one of the buildings warning of APNR cameras and no parking at any times. However before this date I had received no notices.

    Because these were my first two parking tickets I panicked and before doing my research I used the companies appeal programme. Obviously now I realise this was a BIG mistake and these are rigged. I am yet to get a reply but I am anticipating the rejection. In the appeal I requested images of my vehicle and tried to be illusive to with regards if I was driving but potentially have used language such as "I" when referring to the vehicle. My appeal was for the tickets on the 30/31st August. My question is now how should I proceed with these two tickets? Should I ignore their reply outright to their response or now I have opened dialogue should I try to postpone, arguably the driver does not have a great defence if the area is unauthorised, although as a customer of the gym it was believed my vehicle could park there and had done for over a year. As it behind various buildings potentially maybe only specific areas are covered by the APNR.

    This is just the beginning, I have now received a 3rd ticket for the 5th of September for the same amount and reason as above. I then realised my vehicle may have used the spot for parking another 6 times for the gym over September. This could mean another 6 tickets from the same company resulting in a discounted total of £540, an amount of which they could potentially take me to court over. The creditor is ANPR parking services limited (not sure if these are known for court action or not) As I have not referenced the ticket from the 5th of September I am treating this separately to the 2 PCNS I have appealed.

    What I find strange is the inconsistency in the APNR system.
    Last edited by AJP01; 22-09-2017 at 6:24 PM.
Page 2
    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 28th Sep 17, 4:58 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    AJP01
    2) The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who was liable for the charge


    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.''


    3) Inadequate APNR Imaging
    The operator in this case has provided an APNR image as evidence for an alleged parking contravention however as register keeper I contest that the image does not show any visible registration number of the vehicle. Below is an attached copy of the APNR image provided by the operator for the alleged parking offence:


    *APNR Image*


    As registered keeper I contest that the APNR images fail to show any visible number plate of the alleged vehicle. I also argue that the only evidence of a number plate is placed above the image and is not taken at the time of the alleged offence, this could have been added in at any stage. I argue that a number plate is not visible and thus simply placing any number plate above the image is not sufficient evidence of an offence.


    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

    end.
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 28th Sep 17, 11:07 PM
    • 50,691 Posts
    • 64,105 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    *I am unable to make the document a PDF, would I be able to submit using a word document? or does anybody know a way I can convert a document without buying adobe.
    I don't know if all PDF converters need Adobe. If so, use someone else's computer to convert your word document - e.g. send it to a friend attached to an email and ask them to convert it and send it back as a PDF?

    One question i do have is with regards to PCS failing POFA2012 by sending 15 days after the alleged contravention, Is this potentially a new point on its own or is it covered under point 2 of failing to prove the driver? could someone please advise.
    I always suggest you treat that as a separate point, written in your own words as the FIRST point in fact, quoting Schedule 4 and pointing out the dates and the fact if they only dated it on day 15 it can't possibly have reached a keeper in time for keeper liability when a Notice is deemed delivered two working days later (assuming 1st class post was used, which you believe it wasn't in any case) and the operator is put to strict proof of the date the PCS NTK was actually put into the postal system and which class of postage was used.

    Either way, the appellant keeper contends that the NTK arrived too late because it wasn't served until xx/xx/17, as such the keeper cannot be lawfully held liable and the charge cannot be upheld by POPLA because it was not properly given.
    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.

    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 28th Sep 17, 11:21 PM
    • 3,955 Posts
    • 2,207 Thanks
    KeithP
    *I am unable to make the document a PDF, would I be able to submit using a word document? or does anybody know a way I can convert a document without buying adobe.
    Originally posted by AJP01
    No idea what version of Word you are using, but can't you create a PDF from a .doc simply by either using save as or export from the file dropdown list?

    See here.
    .
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 29th Sep 17, 9:23 AM
    • 579 Posts
    • 701 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    Use libre office instead, potentialy. Opens word documents and lets you save as PDF with one click.
    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 29th Sep 17, 7:45 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    AJP01
    Thanks guys, I have managed to convert to PDF and am now on the POLA Appeals page, When I first click on it gives a bunch of options for reasons for the appeal, there is an option for "Other" I have clicked this and it asks if I am submitting this on someone elses behalf, is this correct? I do not want to accidentally name the driver in this process
    • Coupon-mad
    • By Coupon-mad 29th Sep 17, 8:05 PM
    • 50,691 Posts
    • 64,105 Thanks
    Coupon-mad
    No you are not.
    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.

    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 29th Sep 17, 8:10 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    AJP01
    No you are not.
    Originally posted by Coupon-mad

    Brilliant. POPLA appeal has been submitted. Will update regarding the result and POPLA response.


    thanks all
    • Redx
    • By Redx 29th Sep 17, 8:14 PM
    • 16,100 Posts
    • 20,155 Thanks
    Redx
    Brilliant. POPLA appeal has been submitted. Will update regarding the result and POPLA response.


    thanks all
    Originally posted by AJP01
    bear in mind the next popla response could be an evidence pack, in the next few weeks, so have a read around this forum on POPLA REBUTTALS (use the forum search box)

    ie:- get off the back foot and be one step ahead
    Newbies !!
    Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se
    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 29th Sep 17, 8:16 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    AJP01
    bear in mind the next popla response could be an evidence pack, in the next few weeks, so have a read around this forum on POPLA REBUTTALS (use the forum search box)

    ie:- get off the back foot and be one step ahead
    Originally posted by Redx

    Will do, this time ill be ready


    Thanks all!
    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 6th Oct 17, 12:16 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    AJP01
    Update*

    So i currently have 3 PCNs in process all at various stages due to different reasons and so to stop any confusion i have summarized the 3:

    PCN dated 30/08/2017: The driver may have accidentally been named in appeal, as registered keeper i do not have the appeal since it was submitted online, PCS do not mention any confirmation of driver in their rejection reasoning. This is currently with POPLA on grounds of Poor signage as i have dated photographs showing they are inadequate, along with various other reasons

    PCN dated 05/09/2017: Currently with POPLA waiting for appeal result / Evidence pack.


    PCN dated: 31/08/2017: This is the one i now have a few questions about.

    The driver has not been named here, submitted PCS appeal using blue template. They have now directly responded to the appeal: "Thank you for your online appeal, Can you please confirm the name and address of the driver on the date in question, kind regards"
    Obviously as registered keeper i will refuse to name the driver which should have been made clear through the template, my question is have they broken any codes of practice by not sending me a POPLA code? Despite the request for one in the template.
    Also could anyone help me formulate a formal response to the PCS email please.

    Once i have the POPLA code i will start to formulate my arguments.
    Many thanks
    • nosferatu1001
    • By nosferatu1001 6th Oct 17, 2:34 PM
    • 579 Posts
    • 701 Thanks
    nosferatu1001
    No, they have not yet rejected it. Your 5 minutes of research will have shown this is their usual intermediate letter.
    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 6th Oct 17, 2:50 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    AJP01
    They've never responded in this manner before.

    I will reiterate my initial appeal.
    • KeithP
    • By KeithP 6th Oct 17, 6:25 PM
    • 3,955 Posts
    • 2,207 Thanks
    KeithP
    They've never responded in this manner before.

    I will reiterate my initial appeal.
    Originally posted by AJP01
    WHy are you going to do that?

    Ignore that letter and wait patiently for a POPLA code.
    .
    • AJP01
    • By AJP01 13th Oct 17, 5:41 PM
    • 16 Posts
    • 6 Thanks
    AJP01
    Update: Today I received news from POPLA that the creditor in this case APNR services do not want to challenge the appeal for the PCNs on the 30/08/2017 and the 05/09/2017 and I no longer have to pay the parking charges

    2 Successful POPLA appeals against PCS, 1 more to go! fingers crossed that they take the same approach as the last 2 PCNS and lose

    I would just like to say thank you to all that have contributed toward helping me fight these parking charges, it is much appreciated
    • Ralph-y
    • By Ralph-y 13th Oct 17, 5:58 PM
    • 2,333 Posts
    • 2,838 Thanks
    Ralph-y
    well done .....

    would you now consider lobbying your MP .....

    this is a copy of a post by Bargepole ....

    "Some action at last:

    http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/parkingcodeofpractice.html

    This Private Member's Bill has Government and cross-party support, and stands a good chance of making it into statute.

    The full text of the clauses will be published nearer the date of the second reading, but my sources tell me it's something we should support.

    Now would be a good time to write to your MP urging them to support it."

    Ralph
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

1,629Posts Today

6,885Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LordsEconCom: On Tuesday Martin Lewis, Hannah Morrish & Shakira Martin gave evidence to the Cttee. Read the full transcript here: https?

  • Ta ta for now. Half term's starting, so I'm exchanging my MoneySavingExpert hat for one that says Daddy in big letters. See you in a week.

  • RT @thismorning: Can @MartinSLewis' deals save YOU cash? ???? https://t.co/igbHCwzeiN

  • Follow Martin