IPC member vs Newbie advice please

GranUnited

Hi,
firstly I am a newbie here and can only hope I'm in the right place. If not would you mind pointing me in the right direction please. Thanks.

I recently received a PCN from a PPC which is a member of the IPC. I am the keeper of the vehicle and not the driver. I spent a lot of time over the last day and a half reading the FAQs you ask newbies to read before posting and I have to say it has left me feeling rather disheartened. As this PPC chooses to be a member of the IPC rather than the BPA does that really mean they can do as they please?

I understood from your posts that PPCs had to comply with POFA 2012 is that still the case for IPC members?

The PCN issued to me alleges a breach of contract took place in the first week of December 2014 when the car of which I am the keeper and not the driver was parked in a privately run car park for ten minutes. It does not identify the land on which the car was allegedly parked merely the street on which several car parks operated by the same company are situated. I believe this does not comply with POFA 2012 schedule 4 section 8 (2) (a).

The PCN notice to keeper is dated 27 days after the alleged breach occurred which I believe does not comply with POFA 2012 schedule 4 section 9 (5)

Have I understood this correctly and is this ticket enforceable? Any help you can give me will be much appreciated.

Redx

none of these companies have to comply with POFA 2012 , many dont, but then they lose the right to RK liability so have to pursue the driver (doesnt stop them harassing the RK though)

those situated in scotland and N I reland are not responsible under POFA 2012 anyway as it can only apply in england and wales

I suspect that despite any wording they are not trying to enforce POFA 2012 but are trying to scare up a payment by the RK

ps:- despite reading the newbies sticky thread, you appear to have missed this part

If they are a firm which alleges 'keeper liability' under the POFA 2012 (which they don't have to) the Notice has to arrive by day 15 if there was no windscreen ticket, and between day 29 and day 57 if there was a windscreen ticket. Some firms (e.g. Civil Enforcement, Smart Parking and some small PPCs) don't even bother with POFA2012 so the keeper is not liable - obviously the keeper is the only person identified in your appeal then!

only a judge at the SCC can tell you if this ticket is enforceable

GranUnited

Thanks for your reply Redx. It appears I had indeed missed that.

You're correct in thinking that I as the keeper am the only person identified in this case. I was not the driver however so they must be alleging keeper liability.

There was no ticket affixed to the car. The PCN alleges the driver drove off. There was however a parking ticket attached to the PCN which stated the driver was not present.

The said parking ticket contained the details of my VEL but yet the colour of the car is incorrect.

The fact that these companies are not bound by the POFA 2012 in any event leaves me feeling even more disheartened than before.

Thanks for your help anyway.

Redx

they are not bound by the colour of the car either

what you need to appreciate is that its an invoice, so they can pursue an invoice for whatever they may need to , in this case a perceived transgression about parking on private land , they have the VRN and the RK name and address , plus any of their own "proof" or "evidence"

they may allege POFA 2012 but that doesnt mean they are actually doing so , they rarely meet POFA 2012 requirements, which could be a defence in your case

you have the invoice, so you can check if it complies with POFA 2012 or not, assuming they are invoking POFA 2012

from your descriptions it seems to me to fail POFA 2012 , but that doesnt mean they cannot chase this invoice for up to 6 YEARS, just like a garage could chase you for an outstanding bill they think you owe

if we forget about POFA 2012 , they can chase the driver , same as would possibly happen in scotland or N.I.

if they havent met POFA 2012 , you can defend yourself as RK on that basis, never mind any other legal arguments like not a gpeol, no contract, poor signage etc

sounds to me as if they are saying they would have affixed a pcn to the car if it hadnt left the scene , but they cannot do that until after day 28 and before day 56 under POFA 2012 , so as I said, its all a bit ambiguous, but they like to muddy the waters in pursuit of their extravagant claims

stop focussing on the irrelevant (which is what a lot of people do), and focus on the actual relevant

so they have a VRN, they have a RK, they sent the RK this invoice (or invoices) - these invoices may or may not meet POFA 2012 , the driver may have a "contract" with a company of some sort, those are what are relevant

nobody said it was "fair" , never was , isnt , and may never be

hoohoo

The wrong colour windscreen notice is a common trick, designed to get you to write in to complain the colour was wrong, and give away your name and address.

POFA 2012 is clear that the notice must actually be affixed to the car or given to the driver. They admit this was not the case.

Therefore they must serve a notice to keeper within 15 days. They did not.

Therefore, regardless of the wording on the NtK, keeper liability does not apply. As you were not the driver, you were not liabile.

You can therefore appeal on this point, and later, to the IAS. I believe even their kangaroo court would not dare do anything but cancel such a clear cut appeal. Make sure you state you were not the driver.