ParkingEye - Hire Car - POPLA Appeal

Guys_Dad

Fruitcake wrote: »

Issued on day 16 so cannot possibly have got to you within the POFA 14 day deadline unless parking lie have a time machine.

Stick with it and you will win this.

Got to disagree, sorry.

Is it not the fact that the 14 days applies to keeper liability and POFA. That being so, the hire company is off the hook but they are entitled to name the driver and different timescales apply there.

GaryUK

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Got to disagree, sorry.

Is it not the fact that the 14 days applies to keeper liability and POFA. That being so, the hire company is off the hook but they are entitled to name the driver and different timescales apply there.

The hire company can only name the hirer, not the driver. As the hirer of the vehicle, I'm only it's keeper, not the driver.

pappa_golf

very keen on credit searches arn,t they? almost as if they were checking up that you lived in scotland or not?

Guys_Dad

GaryUK wrote: »

The hire company can only name the hirer, not the driver. As the hirer of the vehicle, I'm only it's keeper, not the driver.

Correct but the fact remains that the 14 day point refers to the Registered Keeper as far as POFA goes, not the hirer.

Edna_Basher

Gary's right about there being no hirer liability in this case.

In Schedule 4 of POFA, Paragraph 13 (1) states that the conditions of Paragraph 13 (i.e. those concerning hire vehicles) are applicable if the keeper has been given a notice to keeper within the relevant period for the purposes of paragraph 8(4) or 9(4) (as the case may be).

This means that if a parking company has failed to deliver the initial notice to the registered keeper (i.e. the hire company) within the relevant period, it has already forfeited the right to claim “hirer” liability before the notice to hirer has even been issued.

GaryUK

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Correct but the fact remains that the 14 day point refers to the Registered Keeper as far as POFA goes, not the hirer.

Edna_Basher wrote: »

Gary's right about there being no hirer liability in this case.

In Schedule 4 of POFA, Paragraph 13 (1) states that the conditions of Paragraph 13 (i.e. those concerning hire vehicles) are applicable if the keeper has been given a notice to keeper within the relevant period for the purposes of paragraph 8(4) or 9(4) (as the case may be).

This means that if a parking company has failed to deliver the initial notice to the registered keeper (i.e. the hire company) within the relevant period, it has already forfeited the right to claim “hirer” liability before the notice to hirer has even been issued.

Thanks Edna Basher. I agree. Here are the relevant parts of POFA 2012, Schedule 4:

Paragraph 2(1)
“keeper” means the person by whom the vehicle is kept at the time the vehicle was parked, which in the case of a registered vehicle is to be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to be the registered keeper
“registered keeper”, in relation to a registered vehicle, means the person in whose name the vehicle is registered

Paragraph 9
(4) The notice must be given by—
(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.

Hire vehicles
Paragraph 13
(1)This paragraph applies in the case of parking charges incurred in respect of the parking of a vehicle on relevant land if—
(a)the vehicle was at the time of parking hired to any person under a hire agreement with a vehicle-hire firm; and
(b)the keeper has been given a notice to keeper within the relevant period for the purposes of paragraph 8(4) or 9(4) (as the case may be)

Paragraph 14
(1)If—
(a)the creditor is by virtue of paragraph 13(2) unable to exercise the right to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges mentioned in the notice to keeper, and
(b)the conditions mentioned in sub-paragraph (2) below are met,
the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer.
(2)The conditions are that—
(a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper;
(b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed; and
(c)the vehicle was not a stolen vehicle at the beginning of the period of parking to which the unpaid parking charges relate.
(3)In sub-paragraph (2)(a) “the relevant period” is the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the documents required by paragraph 13(2) are given to the creditor.

So, firstly, because they failed to notify the registered keeper (hire company) within 14 days, they have no right to pursue the hirer. Even if they had managed to notify the hire company within 14 days, they still failed to send the required documentation to the hirer.

Many thanks

Guys_Dad

I agree that they have failed to send the required documentation to you. And there is further appeal point in the failure re 14 day service to the Hire company. You have evidence of the date for the PCN and, out of interest, did the hire company provide the hire contract to the PPC (if you know).

GaryUK

Guys_Dad wrote: »

out of interest, did the hire company provide the hire contract to the PPC (if you know).

It wasn't sent to me and they haven't produced it in their evidence, so I guess not.

Edna_Basher

The BPA and the BVRLA have an arrangement whereby hire companies can pass on hirers' details on to BPA operators electronically without the faff on of having to copy paperwork.

Although this may keep admin costs down, it means that the PPCs never comply with POFA.

GaryUK

Edna_Basher wrote: »

The BPA and the BVRLA have an arrangement whereby hire companies can pass on hirers' details on to BPA operators electronically without the faff on of having to copy paperwork.

Although this may keep admin costs down, it means that the PPCs never comply with POFA.

Surely a scan of the originals is no different to being posted photocopies of the originals? The fact PE sent Enterprise a Final Demand for £100 makes me wonder if the hire car companies cooperate with the PPCs; I'd be surprised if they did.