NPM PCN. Shop in location no longer exists.

LauBar

Hi there.

I've been aware of this forum for sometime and have always directed people who have received PCN's here.

On 22/1/16, whilst using my car, my partner has received a PCN for £100 from NPM.

The PCN was recieved for parking in the rear loading bay of the 99p Store. It states on the NPM signage that anyone parked there must display a valid permit.

My partner works in the bank next door to the 99p Store and has been told by staff (when they come in to get change for their tills) that it is okay to park there as long as it's not a delivery day. Which it was not. Whether said staff had the authority to permit this I don't know, however staff from the bank have parked there before without issue. My partner is going to speak to the 99p Store, armed with this, and also with the point that said bank are giving them change out of goodwill as the shop doesn't actually bank with them (it's a small point I know but you scratch my back etc.) and try to get the PCN cancelled.

If this doesn't work however, and my main reason for posting is, on the ticket, which was attached to the windscreen, the location stated is that of 'That's Entertainment' which is a shop that used to be there before the 99p Shop. This is different to the cases that I can find where they have simply put the incorrect location. This is the correct location as such, as in the location used to be That's Entertainment, but the physical shop named hasn't been there for at least a year.

Would this be classed as incorrect details? Northamptonshire Parking Management are not part of the BPA as far as I'm aware but they are members of the IPC

I have read the Newbies section a few times and looked for some similar threads. So I apologise if I've missed something obvious.

pappa_golf

it is very possible that the contract was with the previous company and the new shop owner knows nothing about this. the new owner needs to be contacted and asked if he has a valid contract with the company , or if rented could he ask the landowner on your behalf.


a simple yes/no at this point would be helpful to you

Redx

your date is incorrect too, please edit it

LauBar

Thanks for taking the time to read my very long-winded post and your prompt reply.

My partner believes she has seen a car parked there before with a permit hanging from the mirror so this makes me inclined to believe that there is some sort of contract however I will still try to clarify with the landowner if they do indeed have a contract and this is not just NPM trying their luck with the staff.

Coupon-mad

Have you read the NEWBIES thread near the top of this forum, so you know how the registered keeper appeals this, regardless of whether they are allowed to ticket here or not? Appeal template there to use for first stage appeals, regardless of circumstances.

No-one is telling you to pay the thing!

LauBar

Hi again. No doubt I'm going to ask something again that's already on the site in plain English but I'm not the greatest at utilising forums.

I appealed this PCN earlier in the year using the template recommended for IAS appeals, and that was that. Never heard a peep.

The original PCN was issued on 22/01/16 and now today 20/4/16 I have received a Notice to Keeper/Hirer (dated 15/4/16).

On the notice it states they haven't received payment, any valid reason for non payment or any disputes. So clearly my appeal has gotten lost somewhere.

It also states;

'If you were not the driver at the time, please contact us and tell us who was driving your vehicle at the time of the parking event above.

If the amount remains outstanding after 28 days, the Creditor has the right to recover unpaid parking charges and any charges associated with recovery.'

I can't see any mention of Keeper Liability or POFA 2012 anywhere on either the PCN or the Notice to Keeper.

Also, the 56 day mark passed approximately a month ago.

Should I reply to this letter with essentially another appeal or do I go another route now?

Thanks.

Coupon-mad

I would respond telling them to cease and desist with this harassment. Point out that the NTK arrived far too late for keeper liability and the driver has never been identified, yet they also ignored your appeal made as the registered keeper (not driver) back in January.

Summarise to say, if they should write contending you are liable, you will complain to the DVLA and to their Trade Body because it is apparent that they have obtained your data far too late to fall within the requirement for 'reasonable cause' and nor have they made it clear that only the driver could be potentially liable in law.

Suggest they take the matter up with the driver and not to write to you again. And you have no obligation to assist them as to who may have been driving. If they believe they have a contract with a particular party it would be up to them to prove the identity of the driver from their own records/photograghs, if any and contact that person.

You could even say that, by reading this letter they accept and understand the following terms:

...you could state you have already spent two/three hours researching the matter and appealing in January, then replying again now. At the litigant-in-person court rate of £19 per hour, plus p&p (if you posted a letter each time - and now) they already owe you over £60 in expenses. By the action of NPM or their agents choosing to write to you again - except to confirm cancellation - they will be agreeing to pay your expenses and time spent on responding to this baseless allegation, the costs for which will continue at £19 per hour plus compensation for your distress due to NPM's vexatious, unwarranted harassment of the wrong party.

IAS will not be contemplated as it is well-reported as a kangaroo court and if NPM believe they have complied with the POFA then you expect to receive a fully compliant Letter before Claim and no further template demands.*



*this is unlikely to stop the letters nor get anywhere fast, but gives you a paper trail to show your costs and the fact you told them you are not liable in law, should they proceed in the small claims track in the end. After this, do not respond again to random debt demand letters but of course, do not ignore a Solicitor's LBC or one from NPM themselves, nor ignore court papers...keep all letters and tell them if you move house because any alleged debt can be pursued in court for up to six years.