Clarification on the 14/15 day rule

Jenniferlee79

Hello, I've been reading the sticky posts and I need clarification on something. One post says the letter must arrive by day 15, another post says 14 days. So I was wondering which was correct. The letter I got is for the 20th November and I just received it today. It's from G24 which is an IPC registered company. I've been reading through the threads, and normally I'm good at understanding things but today I'm afraid my mind isn't grasping information properly. I was parked somewhere that gives you 3 hours free parking but I overstayed by 25 minutes.
Thanks for your help

Guys_Dad

What date is on the Notice to Keeper?)

Jenniferlee79

It's the 2nd of December. At the top of the letter it states it's a conractual parking charge notice if that makes any difference.

Guys_Dad

Then that's within the POFA timescale. POFA assumes delivery 2 days after date of NtK. PPCs have been known to forward date their letters, though.

I would draw a line through that appeal point, I am afraid

Jenniferlee79

Thanks for that. I've just been back to the car park and taken a photo of the notice. The notices are high up on the lamp posts and are quite small and unobtrusive. The sign by the entrance is right next to a zebra crossing and as such when ever you drive past the sign you're more focused on the people about to cross instead. Also the center managements website states that the time can be extended if you talk to the security office. However that is not on any of the signs and the security office is very difficult to find. Even when you do find the intercom no one answered today. Is this something that might be useful in an appeal?

hoohoo

Jenniferlee79 wrote: »

It's the 2nd of December. At the top of the letter it states it's a conractual parking charge notice if that makes any difference.

POFA assumes a 2 day delivery unless proved otherwise.

An acceptable proof would be for you to sign a statement saying it was delivered today; this would be especially understandable, give that we are now into 'Christmas post'.

The IPC kangaroo court might not accept your statement as proof, but a judge would decide if you are beleivable or not. It is therefore worth adding to your appeal.

hoohoo

Jenniferlee79 wrote: »

Thanks for that. I've just been back to the car park and taken a photo of the notice. The notices are high up on the lamp posts and are quite small and unobtrusive. The sign by the entrance is right next to a zebra crossing and as such when ever you drive past the sign you're more focused on the people about to cross instead. Also the center managements website states that the time can be extended if you talk to the security office. However that is not on any of the signs and the security office is very difficult to find. Even when you do find the intercom no one answered today. Is this something that might be useful in an appeal?

Absolutely. Again the kangaroo court will possibly ignore this, but a judge would give it due weight.

Jenniferlee79

Thanks for that. The letter states I can appeal the charges online as well as by post. Is it ok to do it via their website or is it best to do it by post? They also mention sending it registered, is that something I should do if post is the best option?

nigelbb

It's 15 days counting the date of the 'crime' as Day 0.

Jenniferlee79

Thanks for all the advice so far.

This is the letter I've drafted based upon one of the templates.

[FONT=&quot]I am the registered keeper and I wish to appeal a recent parking charge from G24. I submit the points below to show that I am not liable for the parking charge:[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

a). The sum does not represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss, nor is it a core price term. It is a disguised penalty and not commercially justified.
b). As keeper I believe that the signs were not seen, the wording is ambiguous and the predominant purpose of your business model is intended to be a deterrent.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]c). The shopping centre website states “[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The duration of free car parking can be extended for shoppers by speaking to a member of the security staff on site or visiting the security office adjacent to Hobbycraft” however this is not mentioned on the signs. Nor is the security office clearly signposted. Had this information been available at the time then the free time would have been extended. Showing that there was no commercial loss to the land owners, as they would have provided extra free parking. Also the sign by the entrance is right next to a pedestrian crossing. Meaning that drives are focusing on the people walking on the pavement in case they cross, making reading the sign a very dangerous proposition.
d). There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
e). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
f). There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.
g). This is not a 'parking ticket' - it is an unsolicited invoice with as much merit as the publicly-derided £100 taken unlawfully from customers by a dingy Blackpool Hotel.

Your clients should be thoroughly ashamed of the shoddy way you treat consumers visiting their premises as it will put people off visiting and lose them money. The management company of the centre will be made fully aware of this matter and your response, which I will forward to them when I complain in writing and via social media, as appropriate.

The purpose of this communication is:

1. Formal challenge
There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. As such, you must either rely on the POFA 2012 or cancel the charge. I suggest you uphold this challenge now or alternatively, send a rejection letter - subject to accepting my claim for costs as clearly stated below, since you have no case.

2. ''Drop hands'' offer
The extravagant 'parking charge' is baseless but I realise that you may have incurred nominal postage costs. Equally, I have incurred costs to date, for researching the law and responding to your junk mail dressed up to impersonate a parking ticket. It is clear that my costs and yours, at this point, do not exceed £15. Therefore, this is a formal “drop hands” offer. I remind you of the duty to mitigate any loss, so withdraw the spurious charge within 35 days without further expense and I will not pursue you for my costs. If you persist then I will charge in full for my time at £18 per hour plus my out-of-pocket expenses and damages for harassment.

3. Notice of cancellation of contract
I hereby give notice of withdrawal from this alleged 'contract' which was never properly offered by you and certainly was not expressly agreed. This 'contract' is hereby cancelled and any obligations now end. If you offer - and if I decide to use - IAS or POPLA, then the contract ends immediately on the date of their decision (whatever the outcome) so my notice of cancellation still applies. The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation & Additional Payments) Regulations apply now to every consumer contract, save for a few exemptions, which parking contracts are not. It is the will of Parliament following the EU Consumer Rights Directive, that express consent is obtained for consumer contracts now - not implied consent - and that information is provided in a durable medium in advance.

You have failed to meet these requirements. The foisting of unexpected contracts like this on consumers, by stealth, is a thing of the past.

By replying to the challenge you are acknowledging receipt and acceptance of points 2 and 3 above. If you decide to persist with this unwarranted threat, I will be put to unnecessary expense and hours of time in appealing or defending this matter. As such, you will be liable for my costs and a pre-estimate of my loss - and in contrast with yours, mine is genuine - is that this sum will be likely to exceed £100.

I have kept proof of submission of this challenge. I look forward to your considered reply within 35 days.[/FONT]

Is that acceptable? And should I post it or do it online? If I post it what service should I use?

Jenniferlee79

I've just been reading the other G24 thread and like them I also have a photograph of signage with the BPA logo on and "if you breach any of the terms you agree to pay a £70 parking charge." Does this make any difference to my case?