NtK dated 71 days after parking incident

catsandhens

Hello All,
I've just had a good read of the content of this forum and I'm very impressed with the generous help on offer! Thank you!
I received a £100 Parking Charge windscreen ticket on 3rd November 2014 from UKPS (T.R. Luckins Ltd Trading as Uk Parking Solutions) for parking for 10 minutes in a library car park in Devon and not paying 75p. At the time there were only 2 or 3 cars in the entire car park. I accept that I should have paid the 75p. (I didn't because I didn't have change on me but I know that is an irrelevant point). At the time this PPC was not listed on the BPA website so I chose to ignore the ticket. They are listed now.
This week a "Notice to Keeper" letter arrived from TNC Parking Services, a debt collector acting on behalf of UKPS, dated 71 days after the parking incident.
I have copied the template appeal letter from the newbies FAQ but before I send it, I'd like to check that I'm taking the best course of action or should I offer to pay a small amount, e.g. £5, as I was aware that I should have paid the 75p?
Many thanks in advance for any advice.

Redx

send the appeal letter and state that POFA 2012 does not apply as they were outside the 56 day limit

do not indicate at all who was the driver , you are appealing the NTK as Keeper

dont worry if the appeal is rejected, just use popla if they are a BPA member

catsandhens

Thank you Redx, I'll send the letter and post here with what happens next...

catsandhens

My initial appeal to UKPS was rejected with a POPLA verification code. I have until March 3rd to lodge my appeal. I've put together the following text based on a cut and paste from this forum. Please could someone cast their experienced eye over it and check whether I've got it right.
Could I ask why point 3 talks about "the driver" not "me" or "the keeper"? (I just copied the text.)
The only point I haven't mentioned is that the PCN does not specify a parking period, only the time the PCN was issued. Is it worth adding this in as a further point of appeal?
Many thanks!


As keeper of this vehicle I wish to appeal against the PCN notice on the following grounds.

1) The notice to keeper was sent outside the allotted 56 day time frame.
Screen ticket issued 3rd November 2014
Notice to Keeper issued 13th January 2015
POPLA Assessor Matthew Shaw has stated that the validity of a Notice to Keeper is fundamental to establishing liability for a parking charge. Where a Notice is to be relied upon to establish liability it must, as with any statutory provision, comply with the Act.
As the Notice was not compliant with the Act, it was not properly issued and as registered keeper I cannot be held liable.

2) The charge is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
In my appeal and for this charge to be justified a full breakdown of the costs UK Parking Solutions has suffered as a result of the car being parked at the car park is required and should add up to £100.00.

3) Proprietary Interest
The driver does not believe that UK Parking Solutions has demonstrated a proprietary interest in the land, because they have no legal possession which would give UK Parking Solutions any right to offer parking spaces, let alone allege a contract with third party customers of the lawful owner/occupiers. In addition, UK Parking Solutions’ lack of title in this land means they have no legal standing to allege trespass or loss, if that is the basis of their charge.
The driver believes there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles them to levy these charges and therefore has no authority to issue parking charge notices (PCNs). This being the case, the burden of proof shifts to UK Parking Solutions. The driver expects UK Parking Solutions to prove that they are not in breach of section 7.1 of the BPA code.

Redx

the 3 main points should be not a gpeol , no contract with landowner, bad or poor signage that doesnt comply with the BPA CoP

some of your points may need expanding whilst others are not present at all

have you looked at the popla appeals linked in post #3 of the NEWBIES sticky thread ? for guidance ?

so 5/10 for trying and I applaud you for that , but I feel you could double or treble the word count and add a signage point for starters, other members may ask you to do more then I have

so not saying it wouldnt win, it may do, but more effort needs to be put into it , especially signage , not a gpeol and insisting that a witness statement is not sufficient and the unredacted landowner contract be produced

I suppose that you may have lifted the copy and paste from a driver led popla appeal, nopt a keeper popla appeal

this is a danger when you are copying and pasting, without understanding

as for point 1) , remove the part about the screen ticket and the driver

replace it with date of incident only, no mention of a windscreen ticket IF you are appealing as keeper. sometimes too much info is as bad as not enough info

DoaM

And why have you left it so late? You have 28 days from the PPC's rejection and provision of POPLA code to submit your POPLA appeal.

If you sent the 1st appeal on or around 21/1/15, when did UKPC provide their rejection notice?
Have you checked your POPLA code on Parking Cowboy's website to check it is valid and when it expires?

catsandhens

Thank you for your comments DoaM.
I have had flu for the last 3 weeks so only now able to deal with this.
The PPC is UKPS not UKPC.
The rejection letter from UKPS is dated February 3rd, yes I have check the POPLA code, yes it is valid and expires March 3rd so I already know I have to get a move on with this.

DoaM

catsandhens wrote: »

The PPC is UKPS not UKPC.

Force of habit ... we don't see UKPS around here so much.

catsandhens

Thank you for your helpful reply Redx. I have spent a lot of effort reading this forum, of course beginning with the NEWBIES sticky thread post #3. I have taken the text of my first attempt at an appeal, posted in this thread, from the "how to win at popla" appeal links list:

"NPM (any windscreen ticket where the NTK was sent too late for keeper liability) - httx://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...=#post65455955"

I am doing my best to understand and not just blindly cut and paste. As I understand it there is no keeper liability as I have not disclosed the driver and the NtK was sent out 71 days after the PCN, therefore non-compliant with POFA paragraph 8, sub-paragraphs (4) and (5). Are you saying that this is not a valid appeal point to POPLA? If so, why is the above link in the "example POPLA appeals" list found by following the "how to win at popla" link?

I appreciate that I need to expand my other points of appeal and will follow your advice and re-word my first attempt accordingly.

Many thanks.

Redx

if you have not disclosed the driver then as far as this appeal goes you have no knowledge of any windscreen ticket other than what the PPC UKPS may provide , so forget any windscreen ticket or pcn as only the driver would know about them, but this isnt a driver popla appeal, its a keeper popla appeal (assume I was the driver)

use the 71 days as being 71 days after the alleged contravention date , whereas it should have been less than 56 days after the contravention date

I strongly advise you to find a recent popla appeal made by a keeper in similar circumstances and change the PPC name to UKPS all the way through it, focussing on the points you and I have made, including each and every legal heading

it wont take long if you use an existing keeper appeal to popla, hopefully just a cut and paste of UKPS for the ppc name , so something like a UKPC appeal and just change the C to an S

dont make heavy weather of it, dont reinvent the wheel, just use an existing one and adapt it

catsandhens

Thanks again Redx, that's a relief that I'm right in my assertion that there is no keeper liability. Anyway, here's my attempt 2. Any further comments would be much appreciated.


As registered keeper of vehicle registration number XXXX I wish to appeal against the parking charge notice on the following grounds.

1) The Notice to Keeper was not properly given and does not establish keeper liability under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

POPLA Assessor Matthew Shaw has stated that the validity of a Notice to Keeper is fundamental to establishing keeper liability for a parking charge. Where a Notice to Keeper is to be relied upon to establish liability it must, as with any statutory provision, comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 schedule 4.

a) The Notice to Keeper was sent outside the allotted 56 day time frame as specified in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 schedule 4 paragraph 8, sub-paragraphs (4) and (5).

Alleged contravention date: 3rd November 2014.
Notice to Keeper issued: 13th January 2015.

b) The Notice to Keeper does not specify the 'period of parking' as required in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 schedule 4 paragraph 7, sub-paragraph (2).

UK Parking Solutions has not met the keeper liability requirements and therefore keeper liability does not apply. The parking company can therefore only pursue the driver. As the keeper of the vehicle, I decline, as is my right, to provide the name of the driver(s) at the time. As UK Parking Solutions have neither named the driver(s) nor provided any evidence as to who the driver(s) were I submit I am not liable to any charge.

2) The charge of £100 is a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and is therefore not enforceable.
The BPA Ltd Code of Practice requires UK Parking Solutions to be able to demonstrate that the charge is a genuine pre-estimate of loss.
In my appeal and for this charge to be justified I request that a full breakdown of the costs UK Parking Solutions has suffered as a result of the vehicle allegedly being parked at the car park is provided. A claim of operating costs is not sufficient as this does not represent a loss caused by the alleged contravention, it merely represents the normal cost of running UK Parking Solutions’ business.

3) Proprietary Interest
I do not believe that UK Parking Solutions has demonstrated a proprietary interest in the land, because they have no legal possession which would give UK Parking Solutions any right to offer parking spaces, let alone allege a contract with third party customers of the lawful owner/occupiers. In addition, UK Parking Solutions’ lack of title in this land means they have no legal standing to allege trespass or loss, if that is the basis of their charge.
I believe that there is no contract with the landowner/occupier that entitles them to levy these charges and therefore UK Parking Solutions has no authority to issue parking charge notices (PCNs). This being the case, the burden of proof shifts to UK Parking Solutions. A ‘witness statement’ or ‘site agreement’ is not sufficient to provide all the information set out in section 7 of the British Parking Association Code of Practice and I put UK Parking Solutions to strict proof to provide POPLA with a copy of the unredacted, contemporaneous contract between UK Parking Solutions and the landowner.

4) Unclear Entrance Signage
I believe that the signage of XXXX car park was not compliant with the BPA Code of Practice on November 3rd 2014, the alleged contravention date, and could not be seen before parking, so no valid contract could have been formed.
I submit that this signage failed to comply with the BPA Code of Practice section 18 and appendix B. Any alleged contract (denied in this case) could only be formed at the entrance to the premises, prior to parking. It cannot be formed after the vehicle has already been parked, as this is too late. In breach of Appendix B (Mandatory Entrance Signs) I believe that this car park had no entrance signage with information about terms and conditions which could be readable at eye level from within a moving vehicle on arrival. I put UK Parking Solutions to strict proof to provide POPLA with evidence that such signage was in existence on November 3rd 2014.