Civil Enforcement Notice 2 - National Parking Control

Ticketedman

Hi, complete forum novice so apologise if this is posted incorrectly.


Basically, I have received a ‘Parking Charge – Civil Enforcement Notice’ from National Parking Control. After receiving the first notice I copied and sent the template from the Newbies thread, but yesterday received Notice number two.


I would like to ask what action to take, as I have read conflicting reviews about ignoring the notices.


Stupidly, although I sent the initial response via recorded delivery I seem to have misplaced the receipt so have no proof they received the first letter


Any advice would be appreciated. I left out information about the circumstances as, from what I have read it is irrelevant anyway. Should anyone like to know the circumstances I will happily rant about it though…

Thanks in advance.

Fruitcake

Ticketedman wrote: »

Hi, complete forum novice so apologise if this is posted incorrectly.


Basically, I have received a ‘Parking Charge – Civil Enforcement Notice’ from National Parking Control. After receiving the first notice I copied and sent the template from the Newbies thread, but yesterday received Notice number two.


I would like to ask what action to take, as I have read conflicting reviews about ignoring the notices.


Stupidly, although I sent the initial response via recorded delivery I seem to have misplaced the receipt so have no proof they received the first letter


Any advice would be appreciated. I left out information about the circumstances as, from what I have read it is irrelevant anyway. Should anyone like to know the circumstances I will happily rant about it though…

Thanks in advance.

The advice here is never send anything recorded delivery as the PPC may deliberately not sign for it and thus have proof that it wasn't delivered. You should always send appeals first class from a post office and obtain a free proof of posting.

If the second notice is identical to the first, resend your template first appeal but not recorded delivery. If it is a rejection as opposed to a repeat first notice, you then use the POPLA process, copying one nearest to your circumstances from the Sticky for Newbies thread.
Post it on here, redacted so that you cannot be identified, for checking by the experts before you send it.

eta

Is this England or Wales? If so you must never ignore, as advised in the Newbies thread.

Ticketedman

Thanks for the reply, it's England. It is not a repeat letter, the first was titled Civil Enforcement Notice 1. The second letter I received yesterday was titled Civil Enforcement Notice 2. It is not identical, the charge on notice 2 has been increased. So I presume the POPLA process is the next step? I do not have a POPLA code though...


Thanks again


EDIT:
I tired uploading images of the letters, but as I am new to the forum it is not possible...

arabesque_101

You need to upload them to somewhere like photobucket.com and then post the links here without the http://

Ticketedman

Please see scanned letters at the following location:


s1258.photobucket.com/user/Ticketedman/media/National%20Parking%20Control/ParkingNotice1_zps5d51d6b5.jpg.html


Thanks

Coupon-mad

What's the gap in dates between those letters and how long after the parking event?

http://s1258.photobucket.com/user/Ticketedman/media/National%20Parking%20Control/ParkingNotice1_zps5d51d6b5.jpg.html

There are so many misleading words on that NTK I hardly know where to start, such as a heading called 'Registered keeper liability' which is about NOTHING of the sort! And another statement that they will pursue 'the OWNER' if the KEEPER doesn't pay - that's unlawful! And in the front it says 'if you were not the driver then the registered keeper IS still legally liable to pay' (wrong, not when you send a late, non-compliant pile of crap like that the keeper is not!). They have said the keeper is liable when they are not. They have said the 'owner' is liable when they are not. And the name of the Notice including the misleading word 'Enforcement' is nor allowed either, this was a word which was banned by the BPA ages ago in a meeting where the minutes were in the public domain (over 18 months ago).

I knew they used to be BPA AOS members and could see the logo on that letter, but this time I struggled at first to find them on the AOS list but they are 'Cascade Financial Ltd t/as National Parking Control'. Not that the NTK tells you that among all the drivel on it.

Email addies for complaints are in post #6 of the 'NEWBIES read this first' FAQs sticky thread at the top of the forum. You will need to complain to the BPA and the DVLA too, about this horrendously wrong NTK, which is not POFA compliant, cannot create 'keeper liability' but utterly misleads the recipient. You could also forward details to the local Trading Standards Officer once you have it clear in your mind what the misleading statements are (maybe after the BPA has confirmed it once they've looked into it).

But please give us the dates as well, was there ever a PCN on the windscreen do you think?

Ticketedman

Hi thanks for the response, I don't suppose there is a template letter I could use for the complaint is there?

Regarding dates -

Parking notice 1:
PCN ISSUE DATE: 12.05.14
INCIDENT DATE: 20.03.14

Parking notice 2:
PCN ISSUE DATE: 11.06.14
INCIDENT DATE: 20.03.14

Really appreciate your help. I believe it is a self ticketing service, they included 3 pictures of my car on the notice letters that clearly show at least three empty spaces beside my vehicle! I don't believe there was any ticket on the windscreen.

Coupon-mad

No template needed for a simple email complaint to the BPA and DVLA - people can and should write their own genuine complaints of course (templates being the work of the devil IMHO - but I was forced to write one in the NEWBIES thread as 'the appeal template' to save our sanity because so many posters here can't write a letter). Anyway, for your email complaint I have picked out above the main bones of contention in the wording of those letters for you to copy already - it's in my earlier post.

You can add that no windscreen tickets were placed on the car/found by the driver but even if they were, these letters are far too late and worded so badly as to be wholly misleading about liability - and you are minded to report this to Trading Standards if the BPA and DVLA do not act immediately, not only to cancel the PCN but to get this horrendous letter changed and to issue sanction points.

Finally you could add that since the PCNs are called #1 and #2 they are obviously 'totting them up' assuming the driver was the same person each time and you suspect this firm may not even have bothered to get the DVLA data twice (as they HAVE to, for each and every incident they have to apply). So you require the DVLA to check this as well as taking on board the outright lies about 'keeper liability' and 'owner liability'.



Oh, and send the template appeal from the NEWBIES thread to the scumbag PPC and tell them you have complained to the BPA and DVLA and are minded to report them to Trading Standards for these misleading and late letters.

DO NOT ADD ANYTHING THAT TALKS ABOUT WHO WAS DRIVING OR WHO DID/DIDN'T SEE ANY WINDSCREEN PCN!

Ticketedman

Okay - a little update. I have not responded to National Parking Control as I took a new job and been through a busy period of moving about. Been in the new job a few weeks and things are settling down (yey me). Received threat letter No #3 and it has nudged me to get the emails done, as previously advised, to both the DVLA and BPA. From previous posts I have cobbled this email together but would appreciate it if someone casts an eye over it to ensure it's up to the job .. Thanks

---

I have received a parking 'invoice' impersonating a parking ticket from a company called National Parking Control - PCN number: npcxxxxxx. This erroneous ‘Notice To Keeper’, which is not POFA compliant, cannot create 'keeper liability' and utterly misleads the recipient. I have written to the company in question to complain, but have had no response and am receiving further Enforcement letters through the post that state increasing monetary demands and threats of legal action.


There were no windscreen tickets placed on the car/found by the driver but even if they were, these letters are far too late and worded so badly as to be wholly misleading about liability - and am minded to report this to Trading Standards if the BPA and DVLA do not act immediately, not only to cancel the PCN but to get this horrendous letter changed and to issue sanction points.


There are so many misleading terms on the Notice To Keeper, such as the heading 'registered keeper liability' which is about nothing of the sort! And another statement that they will pursue 'the owner' if the keeper doesn't pay! On the front it states; 'if you were not the driver then the registered keeper IS still legally liable to pay' which is wrong. They have said the ‘keeper’ is liable when they are not. They have said the 'owner' is liable when they are not. And the name of the Notice including the misleading word 'Enforcement' is not allowed either. ‘Enforcement’ was banned by the BPA in a meeting where the minutes were in the public domain (over 18 months ago).


Since the Parking Charge Notices are called #1, #2 and #3, increasing charges, they are obviously 'totting them up' assuming the driver was the same person each time and suspect that the firm may not even have bothered to get the DVLA data for each accusation (which I believe is a requirement, for each and every incident). So I require the DVLA to check this as well as taking on board the outright lies about 'keeper liability' and 'owner liability'.

bazster

Here are your specific points for complaint:

1. Impersonation of authority by using the words "enforcement", "fixed", "offence" and "court summons".

2. States categorically "Legal action will be taken for unpaid tickets". I do not believe this statement to be true.

3. Threat of late payment charges is a breach of the BPA AOS Code of Practice.

4. States that "All credit reference agencies will also be advised to register the debt". The operator has no such power therefore this statement is untrue.

5. States that "The vehicle owner is responsible for the payment of this ticket". This is untrue.

6. Keeper liability is alleged when this is untrue as a result of the failure of the Notice to Keeper to comply with POFA 2012 Schedule 4. Specifically:

- there was no Notice to Driver attached to the vehicle, and the Notice to Keeper does not claim that there was. Accordingly the Notice to Keeper was issued weeks beyond the 14-day timescale set out in POFA 2012

- the Notice to Keeper does not identify the creditor

- the Notice to Keeper does not state the period of parking

- the Notice to Keeper does not state the means by which parking terms and charges arising were brought to the driver's attention.

6. An appeal was sent in response to the Notice to Keeper, but no PoPLA code was issued, only another notice exhibiting much the same defects as listed above.

It's always good to state what you expect to get from any complaint, so I would say something like this to BPA Ltd.:

I require to know what action you will take against Cascade Financial Ltd. I imagine that this one Notice alone incurs sufficient sanction points to have their BPA membership revoked.

And DVLA:

It is clearly unacceptable for the DVLA to issue vehicle keeper personal details to a company capable of issuing Notices as defective as this, and I wish to know what action you propose to take with regard to (i) Cascade Financial Ltd. and (ii) BPA Ltd, which is clearly not fit to hold Accredited Trade Association status when its members behave like this.

I note that the operator's website http://issueparkingcharges.co.uk states "Fully approved and supported by the DVLA". Would you please explain to me the precise nature of the approval and support afforded to this operator by DVLA.

Just for general interest (not part of your complaints):

Here's what the Advertising Standards Authority thinks of Cascade Financial Ltd., AKA Mohammed Habib Buksh: http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Non-compliant-online-advertisers/Cascade-Financial-Ltd.aspx

It seems that he also cold-calls people about PPI claims, whilst flagrantly ignoring the TPS: http://whocallsme.com/Phone-Number.aspx/01612145360

He's also associated with multiple dodgy companies offering to buy unwanted gold, one of which, Stark Financial Ltd, has an active website offering to buy your gold - even though the company is dissolved!

Ticketedman

Thankyou for your quick response Bazster. I will add these points to my email. I really appreciate you taking the time to help.