PCN Do I even have grounds to appeal?

Tacopowell

Fruitcake wrote: »

Who told you to wait for the NTK? Normally we advise people to appeal so the PPC forget to send an NTK.
Luckily in this case it doesn't matter as the NTK is late which is almost as good as not getting one at all, but it's usually better to appeal a windscreen ticket.

I suggest you rely to CPS midlands, not TNC and tell them that this is the first the keeper has heard of it and therefore consider it to be the NTK. Then point out it is too late to invoke keeper liability so they should FRO as they have no prospect of success.

Ignore anything and everything you get after that except real court papers.

Excellent, Thank you so much,

I can't recall who told me to wait for NTK, every possibility I read information incorrectly,

I'll contact CPS,
Whats 'FRO'?

Fingers crossed and of course I will update here....

Umkomaas

Whats 'FRO'?

Go forth and multiply. As in F%#$ Right Off!

Tacopowell

Okay, SO I've just recieved another letter from TNC Parking Services today,
Although this a debt collecting company the letter is headed 'Parking Charge Notice' with a box in the top right of the page headed 'Notice to Keeper or Hirer' which contains my details.

The letter says I need to appeal to CPS Midlands within 28 days from the this letter date.

So I need to appeal, as explained above, I need to tell them that this is too late to invoke keeper liability.

I can't really alter the template letter provided https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4816822
as it assumes they've not collect my details yet, I've obviously skipped a step, Could any please help me with a template, I'm in no way legally minded, its a language beyond me!

Would the following template work? It'd need some adjusting to work for my situation?

Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No. ....................

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car and I will complain to the landowner about the matter if it is not cancelled.

I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers.

Further, I understand you do not own the car park and you have given me no information about your policy with the landowner or on site businesses, to cancel such a charge. So please supply that policy as required under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. You have omitted clear information about the process for complaints including a geographical address of the landowner.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 and offer me a POPLA code, or cancel the charge.

I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Any help is very welcome!

Coupon-mad

Wow that's a LATE NTK!!

Yes you can just send that template, which suits this stage too.

Tacopowell

Its just occurred to me that the letter I received also quotes

The signage, Which clearly displayed at the entrance to and throughout the car park, states that this is private land......

Can I assume that they've written this as a precursor to the above quoted template???

In fairness, the signage was there and visible....
In hindsight the template seems to be trumped by their comments.

Redx

very few parking company signs conform to the actual codes of practice or laws, so its not really relevant what YOU think about the signage that is there , it clearly didnt do its job of stopping you in your tracks and thinking about it

just do as CM said above

Tacopowell

Should I add that the NTK is around six months late?

Redx

you can add it yes, plus state that if fails POFA2012 due to the length of time taken to send it to the keeper

dont give away who was driving though