Highview PCN for Double Dipping now CANCELLED - YAY

Cmdr_Bond

I'm minded to think of this too...

https://youtu.be/kxcWtCopXpI

Coupon-mad

And don't forget to prove the spending that followed the double visit. Highview will likely cancel, this thread is in danger of overcomplicating an easy appeal where the main thing to be careful is not to imply who was driving but to show proof of spending and double dip.

Did you read the Prankster Blogs I linked earlier? Highview hated it all! Haha - he really DID appeal with the wording shown.

Cmdr_Bond

I've tried to read them, but I found them a bit long.

I'll try again when I have more time.

Re the appeal, I get where you're coming from and thank you for the advice.

I have decided to "keep my powder dry" as it were, and only appeal on the grounds of the double dip for the time being. I'll save everything else for POPLA should it go that far.

Giving the screenshot of the GPS evidence.

I'll talk to the salesman in Bensons and see if he would be willing to be either, although I'm not really sure what weight the purchase OK another date would carry.

I would understand the "it takes time when making a large purchase" if we had actually spent ages there. But then again, if we hadn't gone looking in the first place, we wouldn't have gone back in.

I wonder if the vets would be willing to stand by us too... It was quite a earth morning IIRC, so there would be no way that we would be leaving an elderly cat with a heart condition in a car for 3 hours while we go shopping.

The 14 days only refers to the payment at the reduced rate doesn't it? As I'm not paying, that means I have the full 28 days to assist it my appeal?

I don't want to leave it to the last minute, but life is handing me lemons right now, so the extra time would be beneficial.

Coupon-mad

POPLA will not be interested in the receipt though. Highview WILL very likely cancel because of it. So this bullet is for Highview, now.

You could always email and say 'we've located our receipt from the large purchase order made the week following the 'double dip' visit to try out furniture and consider our options. I understand you will cancel the PCN due to the size of the spending as a result of that day's visits and if not I will complain again to Bensons and to the landowner about your aggressive ticketing of people trying furniture out and contemplating large purchases. You have put us off ever returning to this retail park - especially given you are relying upon a flawed ANPR system to demand money - and the landowner will hear this from us if you do not cancel the PCN within seven days.

Also when fobbed off by the retailers, why not escalate it and complain to the landowner/agent who runs the retail park (almost always easy to Google and find a newspaper article and/or retail unit adverts saying who runs the site, usually a PDF leaflet with email addies).

The Prankster's Blogs on Highview are funneeeeeee...do read them!!

Cmdr_Bond

Even though the receipt is one week after the event?

Coupon-mad

Exactly, I've suggested what to write above...do most people just go in once and buy a piece of furniture costing a huge amount of money? Nope.

Cmdr_Bond

OK, I think I have my appeal wording drafted. Would you care to give it the once over?

[DATE]

Charge Notice Reference Number [NUMBER]

To Whom it may concern.

I am writing to you in reference to “Charge Notice” [NUMBER], dated [DATE]; issued by yourselves against the Registered Keeper of vehicle registration [REGISTRATION].

In your “Charge Notice” you allege that the vehicle in question was recorded on your client’s property at [LOCATION]. You have provided two (poor quality) photographs to back up this allegation, however neither image shows the vehicle in question definitively in the location you allege.

Your “Charge Notice” neglects to explicitly define which of your “Terms and Conditions” have allegedly been breached. A subsequent visit to the site of the alleged contravention (made upon receipt of your “Charge Notice”) shows the allowable “FREE parking time” to be X hours(s), with a further stipulation that no return may be made within X hour(s). It is therefore assumed that you are alleging that the vehicle overstayed the allowable parking time as set out by the aforementioned signage.

I feel I must point out that “recorded stay” is not the same as “time parked”, as it does not take into account time spent looking for a parking space nor queuing to exit. Nor does it account for any exits and subsequent re-entries to the alleged site within the times stated.

It can be proved that the vehicle was parked elsewhere for a significant period during the times stated, meaning that neither individual “stay” nor the accumulated total “stay” exceeded the maximum time allowed as stated above, and that the break in attendance exceeded the minimum “non-return” time.

It would appear that the Automatic Number Plate Recognition system in use at the alleged location is displaying a serious fault, namely that it has defaulted to show the first entry and last exit of this vehicle on that day.

If your ANPR system is NOT capable of determining multiple entries and exits, and the elapsed time between visits, it is not fit for purpose and should not be used as a basis for which to produce Charge Notices.

If your ANPR system IS capable of determining multiple entries and exits, then the operatives who reviewed the logs and authorised the request to the DVLA for the registered keeper’s details are either:

(at best) poorly trained, incompetent, or negligent; or

(at worst) deliberately setting out to misrepresent the information logged to produce a fraudulent claim, whether off of their own backs or via flawed company policy.

I would hereby request that you review your ANPR logs for the date in question.

The vehicle in question exited your client’s property around xx:xx, was parked elsewhere between xx:xx and xx:xx, and re-entered your client’s property around xx:xx.

If your ANPR system is where you allege it to be, then a search of your log files should be able to confirm the above movements and show that no breach of contract has taken place.

Should you claim that the equipment malfunctioned between the times given, it will be deemed that you are unable to prove any breach of contract.

Similarly, if you have deleted or somehow lost the log files for that day, it will be deemed that you are unable to prove any breach of contract.

A GPS log which corroborates the claim made above that the vehicle in question was not at the alleged site for the entire duration you claim has been attached. This is in the form of screen captures taken from a mobile device. Should you wish to confirm this data with the service provider, you will need to contact them directly, and at your own cost.

[ADDRESS OF SERVICE PROVIDER]

I am also able to provide good reason as to why the vehicle attended your client’s property.

The first visit was for a veterinary appointment for an elderly cat with an ongoing medical condition. [VET] have supplied a copy of the appointment details. You will also note that this was a particularly warm day ([LINK TO WEATHER]), it would be unthinkable for anyone to leave a pet inside a car in such conditions, let alone an elderly pet that has an ongoing medical condition.

The second visit was to investigate new bedroom furniture. While the subsequent and substantial order was not made upon this visit, the same salesman at [STORE] was seen on both occasions. A copy of the invoice has been attached.

I challenge this “Charge Notice” as the keeper of the above vehicle, on the points raised above.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn.

I hereby request that you cancel this “Charge Notice” immediately.

Should you decline this legitimate appeal, then you must either rely on the Protection Of Freedoms Act 2012, and offer me a POPLA code, or cancel the charge.

Failure to cancel this “Charge Notice” will also result in complaints being filed with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, the British Parking Federation, the retailers and the Landowner ([LANDOWNER]).

Coupon-mad

Yes, that says it all, shows them the large receipt and GPS proof of double dip and yet doesn't say who was driving. Nice.

They'd be a bit mad not to cancel it, early doors!

Carthesis

You might choose to add in the bit about the NtK not being compliant with POFA because it doesn't identify the creditor and doesn't specify the breach (assuming it doesnt - the one i got from them didn't), and the signage they have up not stipulating that CCTV data will be recorded and used to request keeper details (again, assuming it doesn't as it didn't in my case.)

Just a few extra rocks to beat them on the head with.

Cmdr_Bond

I'll double check the signage, and look into the pofa wording, although I was thinking of saving that for POPLA, if necessary.

There are many possible rocks I could throw, but with the above I have restricted it to the ones I am certain about.

For example, despite all the help, I'm still not sure entirely about non POFA compliance.

As to the breach, or lack thereof, I did already mention it..

Your “Charge Notice” neglects to explicitly define which of your “Terms and Conditions” have allegedly been breached.