CE Parking Charge Notice even when ticket was bought

Coupon-mad

I would add in the usual paragraph about 'no contract with the landowner which gives CEL the standing to make contracts with, and pursue charges against drivers in the courts in their own name as creditor.' You will see a paragraph like that in the examples.

And I would add another one that there is no registered keeper liability because CEL have chosen to sidestep POFA 2012 and so have issued a Notice would could only ever be directed at a driver. CEL are known in recent months not to cite POFA 2012 because they were not able to ensure compliance with the deadlines and strict wording. As such, CEL cannot hold you liable as registered keeper, where the driver has not been identified.

RaeR

ok thank you something i fond out yesterday another company has now taken over the car park, would this make any difference to anything at all?
you guys have been a great help, thank you

Umkomaas

RaeR wrote: »

ok thank you something i fond out yesterday another company has now taken over the car park, would this make any difference to anything at all?
you guys have been a great help, thank you

Not in relation to your PCN, so carry on as if the original PPC is still in place.

As an aside - do you know who the new PPC is? I wonder if the Co-OP has had enough of CEL harassing its customers? Not that a new one is likely to make much difference!

RaeR

its apparently Smart Parking Ltd(TCP) from what im told

bod1467

Ah. ASDA's buddies.

Frying pan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fire

RaeR

I have added this in there now

No Landowners Contract

I do not believe that the Operator has demonstrated a proprietary interest in the land, because they have no legal possession which would give Parking Eye any right to offer parking spaces, let alone allege a contract with third party customers of the lawful owner/occupiers. In addition, Parking Eye Ltd’s lack of title in this land means they have no legal standing to allege trespass or loss, if that is the basis of their charge. I require Parking Eye Ltd to demonstrate their legal ownership of the land to POPLA.

I contend that Parking Eye Ltd are only an agent working for the owner and their signs do not help them to form a contract without any consideration capable of being offered. VCS -v- HMRC 2012 is the binding decision in the Upper Chamber which covers this issue with compelling statements of fact about this sort of business model.


-I believe there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles them to levy these charges and therefore has no authority to issue parking charge notices (PCNs). This being the case, the burden of proof shifts to Parking Eye Ltd to prove otherwise so I require that Parking Eye Ltd produce a copy of their contract with the owner/occupier and that the POPLA adjudicator scrutinises it in the light of VCS -v- HMRC 2012.

Even if a basic contract is produced and mentions PCNs, the lack of ownership or assignment of title or interest in the land reduces any contract to one that exists simply on an agency basis between Parking Eye Ltd and the owner/occupier, containing nothing that Parking Eye Ltd can lawfully use in their own name as a mere agent, that could impact on a third party customer.



The notice to keeper is not compliant with paragraph 9 (2)(h) of schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 in that it does not identify the creditor . The operator is required to specifically "identify" the creditor not simply name them on it .This would require words to the effect of " The creditor is ..... " . The keeper is entitled to know the party with whom any purported contract was made. This they have failed to do and thus have have not fulfilled all the requirements necessary under POFA to allow them to attempt recovery of any charge from the keeper.

would i add a photocopy of the ticket we bought on the day too or not for this one?

Folkiedave

In fact a good idea to complain. The more letters the CEO gets the more he will realise these scumbags are not doing him any favours.

Coupon-mad

would i add a photocopy of the ticket we bought on the day too or not for this one?

I would.

RaeR

Hi again, is it best to do this online or by post?

Umkomaas

RaeR wrote: »

Hi again, is it best to do this online or by post?[/]

WHOAAAA - just a minute before you dash anything off. You need to thoroughly check your appeal as there's loads of references to ParkingEye. You are dealing with CEL here so you need to be getting rid of any PE refs and replacing them with CEL.

Jeez, you really do need to understand what you're writing here and ensure that it makes sense, the PPC will very easily see you've just randomly copied and pasted from the internet and make a pretty informed assumption that you're not really in the ball with this.

CEL do serve court papers, but often withdraw when they know the motorist is pretty savvy. You don't need to be giving them any excuses to go the full distance with you.