Recent Excel NTK

happyparker

Has anybody received a recent NTK from Excel (ANPR) and found any discrepancies regarding what POFA 2012 requires of it? I find that I keep losing concentration with all of the bright colours, different fonts etc although I'm not sure I have found anything yet. More likley to find BPA code breaches regarding car park etc.

hoohoo

Excel Parking made a conscious decision around Sep 2014 to change their Notices to no longer be POFA 2012 compliant. This means they can no longer enforce keeper liability.

If you were not the driver, it is therefore a slam dunk to appeal for that reason.

Apparently they did this because their internal processes were not robust enough to ensure they would not claim POFA 2012 applied when it did not, and they didn't want to risk a DVLA ban.

happyparker

In what way are the NTKs non compliant?

bod1467

They probably miss one or more of ...

Outstanding fee owed
Duration of parking
Specific wording direct from POFA that must be included in an NtK

... and that's just off the top of my head.

hoohoo

It's more a question of where they are compliant!

They miss out the required wordings.

Because of this you will also notice they make no mention of POFA 2012 or keeper liability.

Coupon-mad

Have we found any discrepancies?! LOL!!

I know 'we' (some of us!) look at this forum every day and it's second nature to us but current Excel NTKs are so blinking obviously NOT designed for keeper liability that I struggle to understand why you are struggling. They have removed the warnings required in the POFA about the keeper being liable, and have replaced it with 'we are pursuing you on the assumption you were the driver'.

Kind of obvious then - a massive clue! Not just non-compliant, as they are NOT MEANT to be compliant any more as hoohoo explained above, it was a conscious decision by VCS and Excel to change their NTKs to a pile of rubbish for the driver only (because they can, because the DVLA says so). This is a document for the driver ONLY - but you do NOT tell them who that was, of course.

By the way you will NOT win at IAS stage unless you can prove with documentary evidence that you were not the driver and also point out to Skippy the Bush Kangaroo at the IAS (like speaking to a 5 year old, with pictures attached!) that Excel's Notices no longer contain the necessary wording under Schedule 4 paragraph 9.

Can you prove you were elsewhere? Even if you can't, do an IAS appeal anyway, here's why:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5149137

If you still lose, shrug your shoulders and complain to the DVLA that effectively, the IAS is swerving POFA 2012's clear protection for keepers and expecting them to prove with evidence (i.e. they want the name of) who was driving, if they were not. That's not lawful, and neither is the decision transparent nor fair, being an anonymous and patronising response from someone who comes across as biased. The 'adjudicator' could even be a 'friend' of Mr Hurley at the IPC - or even Mr Hurley himself - or even the PPC themselves because there is no evidence of independence! How can the public have any confidence whatsoever with this ADR, why are they allowed to operate the opposite of what would apply in any court? They are making it up as they go along to make it impossible for motorists. Why has the DVLA allowed 'forum shopping' by Parking Operators, which has brought the DVLA into disrepute in encouraging a race to the bottom (with the IAS winning by a country mile). Read this blog too:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/popla-board-raises-issues.html

HTH