Notice to keeper - almost 3 months after parking date?

RedGuitar

Hi there - I've received a notice to keeper through on the 14/10/2016 for an offence date on the 27/07/2016. Obviously this is the first thing I will bring up on appeal, there was no ticket on windscreen and the offence was captured through ANPR only.


As this was a while ago I'm not 100% on who the driver was but after discussions believe that a ticket was purchased but the wrong VRN entered / recorded on to the machine.


Any ideas on how to handle this on appeal, wording would be good? I need to challenge that this was ridiculously late and also a machine? error but they did receive payment and had no losses in this instance. Will they provide or even check their database of paid registrations in this timescale? If not can POPLA intervene?


All help is greatly appreciated!

Umkomaas

You need to tell us which PPC you are dealing with.

RedGuitar

Apologies - this was issued from ParkingEye who I believe are a member of BPA?

Umkomaas

Did the NtK (near the foot of the front page) mention anything like 'After 29 days.......' or is there a blank space as if a paragraph us missing?

Where did the alleged infringement take place - not precise location, but was it a supermarket (name of) or hotel, restaurant, doctors surgery, general parking area?

RedGuitar

There isn't anything that mentions anything like after 29 days (but I thought under the POFA paragraph 9 it is 14 days as there was no windscreen ticket?), only details of when the offence was and that they're writing to me as registered keeper (which I am).


It was in a retail park that serves 6 or 7 largish chain stores (Boots, TK Max etc).

Johno100

RedGuitar wrote: »

There isn't anything that mentions anything like after 29 days (but I thought under the POFA paragraph 9 it is 14 days as there was no windscreen ticket?), only details of when the offence was and that they're writing to me as registered keeper (which I am).

And I guess they are also asking you very nicely to tell them who the driver was?

Yes, they have failed to comply, either due to incompetence or by design, with the requirements of POPLA so can't pursue you to court as keeper, but they aren't going to just shrug their shoulders and say "better drop this one were late" when they can still write to you and hope you will pay or name yourself/someone else as the driver.

RedGuitar

Indeed they're asking who the driver was and I'm aware I'm under no obligation to provide this information.


So really I need help drafting my appeal which I'll submit online. I need to put it to them that they've not complied with the Pofa and shouldn't be chasing me as the registered keeper, is it also worth pointing out that parking was paid for, and some issue caused the VRN to be recorded incorrectly?


It's just the wording that I'm struggling with really. I've borrowed and adapted the below but not sure if it's right or not


"Dear Sirs,

PCN REF: XXXXXX/XXXXXX

I am challenging this parking charge notice


1. The notice to keeper was issued on the 14/10/2016 for an offence dated 27/07/2016 which is outside of the 14 days after offence maximum as stated on the Protection Of Freedom Act, Section 4, Paragraph 9 (5). Your failure to comply with the above means you have no legal grounds to pursue me as the registered keeper for costs relating to the above offence.


2. The driver paid for # hours parking and entered the vehicle's registration number in accordance with the instructions.
I request that you check your list of registration details entered against the ANPR listings to identify the mismatched vehicle

3. Even if a mismatch is discovered, it is not necessarily the fault of the driver
Neither is the sum demanded a Genuine Pre Estimate of Loss and is unconscionable under the circumstances.

I request that the charge be cancelled. Failing the cancellation please provide the code to allow me to appeal to POPLA.

Umkomaas

Just use the blue text template initial appeal as provided in the newbies FAQ sticky, post #1. Don't attempt to amend it; it is very carefully wordcrafted to prevent newbies blowing their toes off.

You could add as a final paragraph your para #1 above, with a final sentence added -

'I suggest you contact the driver of the vehicle; as the registered keeper of the vehicle I am well aware that I am under no obligation to assist you in determining who the driver was at the time of the alleged parking event'.

Also please amend your references to 'offence' in the paragraph (there is no 'offence' in private parking). Change them to 'alleged parking event'.

GPEOL (Genuine Pre-estimate of Loss) has been blown out of the water by the Supreme Court in favour of ParkingEye, so to use that in an appeal to PE is completely urinating windwardly.

RedGuitar

Sorry I'm not sure I've got the right text - on the Newbies sticky this is all I can see in blue;


"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 before they park.

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. I believe the driver may well be eligible for cancellation and 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,"






But this is to do with the signing and not really to do with my NTK being late and a fee being paid, but an incorrect VRN logged? Sorry if I'm being a pain but new to this and don't want to "blow my toes off" as put.

Umkomaas

That's the only 'blue text' initial appeal there.

Just adding your para on the late delivery of the NtK is in the hope of a PE immediate cancellation. They have caved in on that point.

The other points you are trying to raise have never (AFAIAA) produced an immediate cancellation. But these points aren't 'redundant'; they should be saved, should it be necessary, for an appeal to POPLA - in due course.

Keep your powder dry.

EDIT TO ADD

But this is to do with the signing and not really to do with my NTK being late and a fee being paid, but an incorrect VRN logged

It's about more than 'signing', but signage is all important as it is that which offers the contract from which all other issues flow.

For example, did the signage detail the requirement to input a VRN? Did it detail the 'penalty' for an incorrect VRN? Did it provide a 'concession' for one incorrect digit, or two digits mistyped, or even transposed? I expect not, therefore signage in this case cannot import a contract to you.

RedGuitar

Many thanks for the help. I've sent through;


"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.


The notice to keeper was issued on the 14/10/2016 for an alleged parking event dated 27/07/2016 which is outside of the 14 days after an alleged parking event maximum as stated on the Protection Of Freedom Act, Section 4, Paragraph 9 (5). Your failure to comply with the above means you have no legal grounds to pursue me as the registered keeper for costs relating to the above alleged parking event. I suggest you contact the driver of the vehicle; as the registered keeper of the vehicle I am well aware that I am under no obligation to assist you in determining who the driver was at the time of the alleged parking event.


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 before they park.


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.


I believe the driver may well be eligible for cancellation and 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,"


Will update once a reply is received.