Napier Parking - Notice to Keeper

rokx

This is a follow up to another thread where I got a parking ticket when I was 15 mins late back to my car.

After ignoring the ticket, I received a letter from Napier Parking, so thought I would post it here, partly in case anyone is interested and also just in case anyone advises that I should appeal it, rather than ignore it and put up with the letters. As it was only "observed" within a 10 second interval, could this be a grounds for appeal?
The letter:

Guys_Dad

I am not sure about this company. The best solution may be IGNORE.

But I would appeal. There is a pretty short an standard appeal letter done by one of the regulars who will be along to give you a link.

Do no more till then.

peter_the_piper

That is one hilarious letter, about the only thing that's right is the date, "Drivers legal responsibility to pay"" ""please do not send case through the post""what a load of tosh.
As above ignore.

Stroma

There is no such legal responsibility to pay them unless they issue a small claim, win the case and you have 28 days to pay the judgement. This company do issue claims on occasion , though you don't say your circumstances it could be worth going to popla in this case.

Coupon-mad

Napier do try small claims and do own some of their car parks (although sometimes they are actually owned by ANOTHER Ltd company owned by the same family - so don't discount asking for their site agreement/contract with the landowner to act there, in your POPLA appeal later on, as we always advise).

I would plan to appeal before the 28 days is up and then when rejected, use POPLA if this was in England/Wales.

But I did last week advise someone about a Napier fake PCN and the funny thing was that he used the online contact address in the first instance to just ask for 'photo and other evidence so he could make an informed decision about whether to appeal.'

Guess what?

They rejected his non-appeal and sent him a POPLA code which I felt put him in a much stronger position as he could argue they didn't follow due process for appeals as set out in the BPA CoP and that he had not been allowed his right to an initial appeal. Also you will have the fact that they haven't offered a 40% discount (also in the BPA CoP as already mentioned in your first thread).

But I would not mention any of that yet, I would send a simple email like he did and see what you get back at first...

Also in the meantime look at their online published t&cs for the car park (probably a PDF) and find any stated fact that breaches the BPA COP which is linked here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4535287

Just a bit of light reading whilst you wait for a response to your request for evidence. Diaraise NOT to miss your 28 day appeal deadline though if they should not take the bait, if you get near to that you will have to send an appeal in on time - unless you are going to ignore them.

climber89

Be careful with this company, there are a few others also to watch out for, as they do take people to court and it would appear (as a friend at work found out after they issued a claim against her) that they win... My friend didnt go to court in the end she settled but it cost her like £120 and a whole lot of effort, better than what she could have been faced with. Think their claim was something around £200 with Solicitors costs Best appeal is my advise if they have issued incorrectly...

fisherjim

climber89 wrote: »

Be careful with this company, there are a few others also to watch out for, as they do take people to court and it would appear (as a friend at work found out after they issued a claim against her) that they win... My friend didnt go to court in the end she settled but it cost her like £120 and a whole lot of effort, better than what she could have been faced with. Think their claim was something around £200 with Solicitors costs Best appeal is my advise if they have issued incorrectly...

A very suspect post if ever I saw one!!!!!

climber89

Its only fair if people asking for some advise are given a balanced view, and PPC's do seem to be issuing an ever increasing number of claims. This barristers view was there was a 50% chance PPC's such as Napier will sue... That was pre this new law where they can hold the keeper liable justanswer.com/uk-traffic-law/74joi-issued-parking-fine-napier-parking.html cant post links as newby!

Stroma

The balanced view is to give people all the options then they decide what to do. Napier like other scammers on the whole very rarely issue a claim. This is a fact

C_Mababejive

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

real1314

climber89 wrote: »

Its only fair if people asking for some advise are given a balanced view - an informed view ould be better , and PPC's do seem to be issuing an ever increasing number of claimsHave you any evidence at all of this/ or have you just made it up? As you've stated it, you should be able to back it up or people will inevitably judge the quality of your comments accordingly . This barristers view was there was a 50% chance PPC's such as Napier will sue..Erm, that's a wild guess/stab in the dark/ finger in the air - any fule can see how vague that claim is . That was pre this new law where they can hold the keeper liable justanswer.com/uk-traffic-law/74joi-issued-parking-fine-napier-parking.html cant post links as newby!

really, this is such a weak, uninformed response