norfolk parking enforcement

Umkomaas

Grimble wrote: »

Planning permission???????

Has never interested POPLA.

Grimble

Might interest the council and EDP.

Coupon-mad

gregsayer wrote: »

just comparing the PCN to the template letter,
they seem to have basically copied and turn round the PoFA wording, in order to comply, can this still be challenged?

Of course! And you are wrong IMHO, the NTK is nothing like compliant.

have they made it watertight?

Hell no!

Re the flaws in the NTK, here you go, this is about NPE PCNs but obviously this is only ONE appeal point of those you've already been advised to research & include, so this is not 'it' on its own:



No keeper liability under Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 – flawed NTK wording.

As the appellant, I am the keeper and have at no point admitted who was the driver of the vehicle and no evidence of this has been provided. In order for the appellant to be liable for the charge the keeper liability requirements of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 must be complied with. One of these requirements is the issue of a ‘notice to keeper’ compliant with certain provisions and statutory, prescribed wording. The operator must produce evidence that this has occurred as the liability is not based in the law of contract but is created by the statute.

Since the ‘notice to keeper’ has the following omissions, POPLA cannot find that the charge notice is enforceable against me as an appellant keeper:

(a) Schedule 4 paragraph 9(2)(i) is not met.
The notice does not meet the mandatory requirement to state the date the Notice was sent. A notice must: 'specify the date on which the notice is sent (where it is sent by post) or given (in any other case)'.

There is no ‘date sent' or ‘date given’ on the NTK at all. The ‘date of the Notice’ was not the date it was posted because it did not arrive for several days. I require NPE to show their proof of when the Notice was actually ‘sent’ which they should have a record of, particularly if they use iMail or similar.



(b) Schedule 4 paragraph 9(2)(b) is not met.
‘The notice must inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full;’

NPE do mention 9(2)(b) and their words are: 'the driver is required to pay the parking charges in full' but they don't state the mandatory wording that 'the parking charges have not been paid in full'. It's certainly not the same thing and cannot be paraphrased. Their words do not communicate the prescribed meaning intended by statute. Nowhere on the NTK does it specifically inform me that the driver ‘has not paid’ parking charges in full.


(c)Schedule 4 paragraph 9(2)(c) is not met.

The notice must ‘describe the parking charges due from the driver as at the end of that period, the circumstances in which the requirement to pay them arose (including the means by which the requirement was brought to the attention of drivers) and the other facts that made them payable.’ There is nothing in the notice which meets this requirement. I see no description of any ‘parking charges due from the driver at the end of parking’ nor any ‘circumstances and other facts’.


(d) Schedule 4 paragraph 9(2)(d) is not met.

The notice must ’specify the total amount of those parking charges that are unpaid, as at a time which is— (i) specified in the notice; and

(ii) no later than the end of the day before the day on which the notice is either sent by post or, as the case may be, handed to or left at a current address for service for the keeper’
There is no such ‘time specified in the Notice’. Further, this NTK does not ‘specify the total amount of any parking charges that are unpaid by the driver as at a time no later than the day before the date the NTK was sent’ - not that the NTK states when it was sent, as already covered in (a).


The conclusion must be that there can be no keeper liability in this instance because the mandatory, prescribed wording in Schedule 4 of the POFA 2012 is a matter of statute which has not been met.

gregsayer

trying to write the appeals letter to popla, and confused as hell

Umkomaas

gregsayer wrote: »

trying to write the appeals letter to popla, and confused as hell

Your principal task at this stage is to urgently signal your intention to appeal to the new service delivering POPLA in the near future. POPLA will not deal with your appeal now.

Please read the following link (and follow the sub-links within it) which will explain what you now need to do.

Your case will be put on hold (giving you more time to work on your appeal) until around late September/October.

BUT - you must notify your intention to appeal before your current POPLA deadline expires. Miss that and you've got six years where the PPC can instigate proceedings against you.

Here's your link:

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/popla-changeover-starts-tomorrow.html