Fine on hospital property, given to staff

Scigal_2

Im a bit confused. So the RK needs to fill in the paper work (the RK will be very cross, the RK wasnt the driver).

Fully defended.

No loss to company, permit is paid every month but new one wasn't picked up, email breakdown in collecting it.

Angry letter went to dvla about releasing RK details to a company who is not on the appropriate list.

Strong reason for parking in the wrong area...and in fact the notice on the wall is at a 45 degree angle and is not in the eye line as you drive in, or exit the car, or go to the door. Its very cheeky where they have positioned it!

You need to turn back and look half round a corner to see it!

I did send an appeal letter asking for popla code but this was ignored.

No LBA, on,y the initial invoice....way way ahead of the 56 days. And a double the cost letter. But nothing else.

Is that what we write?

The parking prankster link is great, nut its not parking eye, shall i get it anyway and tailor it?

Scigal_2

Ps the claim says a LBA was sent...but it did not state is was a LBA anywhere!

Coupon-mad

No LBA, only the initial invoice....way way ahead of the 56 days. And a double the cost letter. But nothing else.

Is that what we write?

That's certainly not the sum total of your defence but it is relevant to mention you were never sent any LBA. I thought you were sent something in November though, when I looked back to those posts?

Yep it is for the keeper to defend. Who are Trethowans listing as their client? the Hospital themselves or is there a Private Parking co involved?

Scigal_2

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That's certainly not the sum total of your defence but it is relevant to mention you were never sent any LBA. I thought you were sent something in November though, when I looked back to those posts?

Yep it is for the keeper to defend. Who are Trethowans listing as their client? the Hospital themselves or is there a Private Parking co involved?

Hi thanks,

The incident occured 16/10th. First letter asking for moneybreceived 1/11, 2nd ketter wanting twice amount recieved 28/11. Same day as they presented an award to domeone in the household...

No LBA at all.

Trethowans are the hospitals solicitors, the court paper says the hospital is the claimant. So the hospital is the client. (Who dont appear on bpa as far as i can see)

Coupon-mad

Well if the case has been levelled at the registered keeper and they were not driving then they have one of their clear defence points = they are NOT liable. 'Keeper liability' can only be established if the requirements of Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 are met. That would have involved sending a fully compliant Notice to Keeper between day 29 and day 56 after the windscreen ticket. They did not, so there is NO keeper liability.

Check the link to POFA Schedule 4 which is in the NEWBIES FAQs sticky thread. It's written in bullet points; it is easy to see what the letters SHOULD have said, specifically, if they were to hold a keeper liable. If there was a windscreen ticket, then paragraph 8 in the link describes what the NTK must have included when sent after 28 days and on/before day 56.

I think they have got around the 'reasonable cause' to get the DVLA data because they are not a PPC, and the Hospital could show reasonable cause (and their solicitors are acting for them in that regard). But they could ONLY get that data for the purpose of trying to level this charge at the driver.

Now, that is a reason for the driver to stay unnamed throughout (the keeper does NOT have to name the driver although at a hearing I would not suggest they ever lie of course, if the Judge asked). But the point is, it is not for the keeper of a car to make the claimant's case for them nor to speculate who may be liable. They are there to defend the claim and say 'I am not liable as POFA 2012 has not been invoked here and I was categorically, not the driver'. And they can add the usual stuff that the charge is a penalty, not a genuine pre-estimate of any loss caused by the alleged 'breach', etc., as you will see in the Parking Prankster's info which should still be useful to you.

And the defendant can also say the Solicitor failed to follow the Practice Direction, failed to send a Letter Before Claim which would have enabled the keeper to have sent a formal response (see the 'LBCCC Fightback' sticky thread near the top, to see what retired Solicitor zzzLazyDaisy says a Letter before Claim should have contained).

The basic summary of 'what happens when and what to send when' that you may need first, is in bargepole's link that I have put in the NEWBIES FAQs thread.

HTH

Scigal_2

Brilliant thanks, wish id seen it before i emailed PALS and the CEO just now though. I may have done the wrong thing. I asked pals to intervene and have it cancelled, laid out my reasons.. I also asked what was happening to the complaint i made...i had been sent another patients full confidential records in the post by accident.and also complained about my medical confidentiality being broken and my whole dept finding out stuff about me. And that i am embarrassed given that the hosp gives me awards for my work. No idea if I will stir up trouble or get help but what's the worst they can do?

Coupon-mad

I don't think that's a problem - I too would have complained. It does not change the urgent 'acknowledge the claim and defend' action needed by the registered keeper. You will see from Bargepole's link I mentioned before in the above post, what to do and by when.

Scigal_2

Gosh yes i forgot about that thank you! will get the acknowledgement sent off, there was no way of doing it online, no password etc

The CEO mailed back and said they are looking into all of my issues!

Scigal_2

Well that didnt amount to anything, I will need to file defence this evening.

Coupon-mad

What? You haven't pressed ahead and submitted a defence after the acknowledgement?! Gawd that's cutting it fine! You will get a default LOSS at this rate!

Remember to defend as keeper.

POFA 2012 not followed so no keeper liability, plus the usual defence points shown in links in the NEWBIES thread (under small claims).