University of York Parking Fine

amir500

This is the email I'm sending to the DVLA and BPA. Should I make any changes?

PCN No xxxx
Car Reg xxxx


Dear Sir,

I am writing this letter of complaint as I am in receipt of a Notice to Keeper (NTK) from the University Of York, members of the BPA and AOS. As members of the BPA and AOS I would expect the University Of York to adhere to the code of practice layed out by the BPA and AOS.
I am sorry to say that this is far from the truth and the letter I have received has lost my trust in your organisation.

The NTK states they understand me to be the driver - This is absurd as I was not on the day in question and am able to prove that I was in a different town at the time in question although I readily admit to being the Registered Keeper and then says I am required to .. which is also not true as an AOS member is only allowed to invite me to pay the amount or give the details of the driver in question. The universities allegations of me being the driver and holding me accountable is a serious breech of conduct, because as keeper I am not liable, the driver is.

Furthermore, the University of York is using bullying tactics to try and evoke keeper liability: I received this NTK 84 days after the alleged offence and under Schedule Four of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012, for the notice to try to invoke keeper liability to be valid it must conform to the mandatory requirements of POFA 2012 and be received no more than 56 days after the Notice To Driver, thus rendering keeper liability inapplicable

I hope and expect companies registered with the ASO to adhere to a strict code of practice and to my disappointment, The University of York has failed to do so.

As a result I would like this parking charge to be canceled for gross misconduct and I would also like the University of York to reconsider their code of practice when dealing with private parking charges. I have already sent an email to the the University, but I have emailed you to ensure that they understand that this is unacceptable.

I will attach a copy of the NTK sent to me by the University of York as evidence.


Many Thanks

xxxxx

This is the email I have sent to the Univesity

Dear Sir or Madam,

Ticket number:xxxx
Vehicle registration number: xxxx

You claim you issued me with a parking ticket on 19/06/2014 but I believe it was falsely issued, as nor I or any of the drivers of the vehicle have occurred any parking fines on this date. This is the first I have been made aware of any contravention taking place. I decline your invitation to name the driver, which is not required of me as the keeper of the vehicle.

I will not be paying your demand for payment for the following fine as The Notice to Keeper failed to meet the obligations of Schedule 4 of the POFA Act 2012; for the notice to try to invoke keeper liability to be valid it must conform to the mandatory requirements of POFA 2012 and be received no more than 56 days after the Notice To Driver, thus rendering keeper liability inapplicable.

As this Notice to keeper was sent at an absurdly delayed date, I took to your website to view the images of the alleged contravention, which were not available.

I expect this fine to be cancelled immediately. If you choose to pursue me please be aware that I am fully prepared to take this case to the POPLA and will be pursuing all the costs that occur within this matter.

Yours faithfully


xxxx

Coupon-mad

Yep that will do, and make sure you send the BPA an attachment copy of the NTK and highlight where it says the keeper is liable, and highlight the two dates.

martmonk

The original post specifically says that there was no windscreen ticket and therefore 56 days isn't the correct timescale to be quoting, unless of course the uni are claiming that there was one.

The_Slithy_Tove

Needs a proper proof read as it's full of errors and use of incorrect words (malapropisms). I would list them but I lost count.

Coupon-mad

So did I - nearly started to correct the spelling but I thought it would do the job at this stage.

martmonk wrote: »

The original post specifically says that there was no windscreen ticket and therefore 56 days isn't the correct timescale to be quoting, unless of course the uni are claiming that there was one.

Yep but in this context it's too late for either deadline, so the Uni of York has got it wrong wither way.

Coupon-mad

Have you got an update yet? This poster got his cancelled:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5016513


HTH

Hot_Bring

As we seem to have a moron stopping proper threads being displayed ..... bounce.