Just received a PCN and confuse

Umkomaas

http://s1160.photobucket.com/user/gb1962/media/lu/front_zpsbkrmiy2s.jpg.html

http://s1160.photobucket.com/user/gb1962/media/lu/back_zpshf3v4ts3.jpg.html

Well they're out of luck for keeper liability as the NtK was served too late - 63 days (to your receiving it) by my calculations.

But I expect they'll be dancing around the presumption that the keeper was the driver, but let's see what they say when they respond to the IPC appeal template from the newbies sticky.

Unlike general, run of the mill PPCs they won't be dealing with this stuff on a daily basis, so they might well make a hash of things.

gb1962

Thanks to everyone for your help - I was losing the plot yesterday! I'll send off an email challenge to the PCN and post an update when I receive a reply.

GB

gb1962

I sent my email challenge off earlier, but should have been a bit more rigorous in my approach. I took pictures of the signage at one of the entrances and have found that from the layout of it, the 'Failure to Comply will result in an £80 Parking Charge' can be interpreted to apply to one time period and not the other. I should have picked this up before and added it to my appeal.

Coupon-mad

Doesn't matter. With IPC members they'll turn it down anyway. If you thought this would win an IPC appeal you haven't read enough. IPC appeals are not won by consumers, they are (probably) not meant to be; it's considered by many here to be a kangaroo court.

Basically the point of challenging the PCN is just that - to challenge it. Then IGNORE IT and any begging letters and demands, taking seriously only a Letter before Claim or court papers.

I am not saying the POFA argument was wrong - it is 100% correct. But IPC appeals are not there to be won, so don't beat yourself up about not making the appeal stronger, as regards signage. It would not affect the rejection letter!

Relax, you have said your piece and you are NOT liable in law. Let them write. IGNORE. In court, the fact you are not legally liable would be your first defence point and signage could be your second. In our experience, which is pretty vast and we've seen some real howlers, you will not get a fair hearing at the IPC so ignore the 'offer' in the rejection letter.

gb1962

It all sounds so depressing and frustrating.

GB

gb1962

Hello again.

Could someone offer some advice on whether GPEOL is still relevant and when/if it could be used? I've noticed the PCN I received says 'liable to pay a charge if they breach these terms and conditions' but don't fully understand whether this would justify the GPEOL argument.

Thanks,

GB

Coupon-mad

GPEOL is a non-starter after the Beavis case - and it is not depressing! Just be ready to ignore it; people have ignored these for a decade and didn't get depressed by the lack of appeal opportunity. Poeple have enjoyed ignoring these for soooo long, the only difference in recent years has been POPLA was available for some to be easily killed off.

Not a big deal.