Parking Eye letter.

Herzlos

But isn't keeper liability discharged after naming the driver, or is there a clause that the driver must be responsive?

It sounds like the driver has ignored them and PE are seeing an easy opportunity to try the keeper again?

Coupon-mad

There is no clause in the law which allows this. But the BPA will 'allow' it I expect because they support PE. The driver should not expose the keeper to this rubbish and should not have ignored it. The keeper will have a job on their hands to explain the law to a Judge if they get sued, because court is a lottery and PE use Solicitors.

matttye

Coupon-mad wrote: »

There is no clause in the law which allows this. But the BPA will 'allow' it I expect because they support PE. The driver should not expose the keeper to this rubbish and should not have ignored it. The keeper will have a job on their hands to explain the law to a Judge if they get sued, because court is a lottery and PE use Solicitors.

"Sir/Madam, in accordance with Section 5(1), Schedule 4, POFA 2012, the operator can only take steps to enforce the PCN against me (the registered keeper) if they are unable to take steps to enforce against the driver because they do not have the driver's name and address.

I have provided the operator with the driver's name and address and the operator therefore has no power in law to pursue me for the unpaid PCN.

The driver's lack of response to the NTD served on them does not stop the operator from enforcing against the driver - i.e. by serving court papers on them."

Simples.

Coupon-mad

Yep but still the keeper will quite possibly now get a court claim and will have to jump through the hoops of defending it in time and maybe having to turn up for a hearing. Not anyone's idea of fun unless you are Perky, Dyl Kurpil, Stephen Hall or LPC law (or other lawyers).