Parking Charge Notice - Civil Enforcement Ltd

ed67812

All,

Sorry, if I am being thick - I've tried to get my head around the stuff in the newbie thread.

The attached PCN was received on 12/01/15 from an incident on 18/12/14.

The bit that confuses me is from when I've read; This PCN (there was no windscreen ticket) is addressed to the keeper. There is nothing on there indicating that they allege keeper liability under POFA2012.

So because they are not relying on POFA2012, the keeper is not liable?
And therefore, the only person that could be pursued is the currently unnamed driver? Am I correct?

If they had relied on POFA2012, then would the notice be out of date?

I am always one to comply with the law of the land (right or wrong) but in this case, I cannot see any legal requirement for the keeper to name the (currently unidentified to them) driver? So am I correct in appealing to them as the keeper in the 3rd person?

Thanks all
Ed

i.imgur.com/XoGLFTm.jpg

bluetoffee1878

The small print at the bottom has all the blurb about the driver being responsible, but they do not know who that is do they, and I wouldnt think that you would want to tell them. Also rerefrences POPLA. I would think one of the regulars on here would be able to advise whether it is a compliant NTK (It probably is not).
Best thing is to challenge as the RK using the template in the newbies thread, if upheld, you win if not appeal to POPLA and you will win with the added benefit of costing the PPC money (see how to win at POPLA)

bazster

You are absolutely correct that there is no requirement for you to name the driver.

That NtK is most certainly invalid from the point of view of keeper liability.

For an ANPR ticket the NtK must arrive within 14 days. For a windscreen ticket it must arrive between 28 days and 56 days. This one falls between the two, so whichever way you look at it, it is invalid.

Grab an appeal template from the Newbies thread, read it carefully amending as necessary, add in the stuff about the NtK being hooey from the point of view of keeper liability, invite them to take it up with the driver, and be very careful not to say who that was!

ed67812

The challenge that I intend to send to these cowboys is, as per the newbie thread, based on the template which states that the challenge will be on these main grounds:

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.
c). There is no evidence that you have any proprietary interest in the land.
d). Your 'Notice' fails to comply with the POFA 2012 and breaches various consumer contract/unfair terms Regulations.
e). There was no consideration nor acceptance flowing from both parties and any contract with myself, or the driver, is denied.

Two questions - which I do not think are covered in the newbie thread
1. Why wouldn't / shouldn't I include the challenge about ANPR entry and exit which is one of the challenges on the 'how to win at POPLA thread'?
2. Should I add in anywhere the fact that the PCN only names "car park" on name of road. Google earth shows me that there are multpiple car parks on the massive road. So unless the unnamed driver can recall every car park they have ever used, how would I or they, be able to fairly look at the signs now?

I have read and read the threads (which I appreciate, I hadn't done when starting this post) but feel these questions are legit.

Thanks

ed67812

Can anybody help with the above, before I fire the challenge off to the PCN issuer?

Umkomaas

There's no reason not to add them, but they will have no impact with the PPC - your appeal is already rejected before you send it in the vast majority of cases.

These really are points more appropriate to your POPLA appeal (and why they are referenced in that section of the NEWBIE sticky). You need to keep a bit of your powder dry - and still up your sleeve.

There's also the danger by going off piste on the initial appeal, you reveal inadvertently who the driver was, destroying in one fell swoop any previous protection for the keeper under PoFA 2012. The initial appeal has been carefully wordsmithed to avoid that possibility.