PCS Notice of Liability

messi1984

Will email them full copy of NTK without hiding any details and I will include this question.

messi1984

Received the following:

Thank you for your reply and attachment.

Having reviewed the information you have provided, a Notice to Driver was fixed to the vehicle 23 October 2016. The section of Code stated in our previous email relates to the amount of the charge when this notice to driver was issued. As the operator has not heard back from the driver within the 28 day timescale, they have passed the charge to a 3rd party company, who have attained keeper details from the DVLA and issued a Notice to Keeper. When this is the case, the 3rd party company may add on their own charges, increasing the amount due, as per the collection process.

As there has not been a breach of our Code of Practice in this instance, we are unable to assist you further, and would advise that you direct your enquiry to the parking operator so that they may address any concerns you have.

Yours Sincerely,

AOS Investigations Team

Coupon-mad

Absolute RUBBISH.

A NTK cannot add on extra costs, this is not debt collector stage 'as per the collection process' this is NTK stage.

Reply to them and copy in David Dunford of the DVLA.

messi1984

How about this:


Thank you for your email

I had mentioned in my first email that the letter was the notice to keeper and I was under the impression that the first reply I received was about the notice to keeper.

Also whilst reading schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, it has come to my attention that the notice to keeper must specify a discounted charge to the keeper as the this is the first point of contact with the keeper. The notice to keeper I received is from the parking company and not the debt company and I understand that the debt company is allowed to add charges according to the BPA code of conduct but not the parking company itself.

I would greatly appreciate if you can provide me with more information.

Many Thanks

Fruitcake

It is quite possible that the driver did not tell the keeper about the original PCN, so the first thing the keeper knew about this was seeing the NTK asking for £120. That amount is a BPA breach.

Coupon-mad

messi1984 wrote: »

How about this:


Thank you for your email

I had mentioned in my first email that the letter was the notice to keeper and I was under the impression that the first reply I received was about the notice to keeper.

Also whilst reading schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, it has come to my attention that the notice to keeper must specify a discounted charge to the keeper as the this is the first point of contact with the keeper. The notice to keeper I received is from the parking company and not the debt company and I understand that the debt company is allowed to add charges according to the BPA code of conduct but not the parking company itself.

I would greatly appreciate if you can provide me with more information.

Many Thanks

I would not send that - IMHO it is focussing on the wrong thing and you will get nowhere. There is no requirement to state a discount on a NTK a month or so after the discount was offered to the driver on a PCN. The keeper does not have to be offered it if the PCN did.

Don't even refer to PCS as a 'debt company' because this NTK is not under that scope. Like I said before, correct them about what stage this is at - it is NOT at debt processing stage. £100 is the maximum on any NTK (no matter who issues it for a parking firm) and this is appeal stage. Cannot exceed £100 at NTK stage, they need to read their own CoP and stop defending the indefensible.

Be assertive and copy in David Dunford at the DVLA again and say how concerned you are that the BPA can't tell the difference between NTK stage and debt collector stage.

A NTK cannot add on extra costs, this is not debt collector stage 'as per the collection process' this is NTK stage.

messi1984

I see what you mean, I will go with this

Dear sir/,

Allow me to correct you about what stage this is at - it is attached is not a debt processing stage letter. £100 is the maximum on any NTK. I’ve double checked BPA COP see URL below it says clearly “If your parking charge is more than £100 you should reduce your charges and not use any existing notices unless the higher charge can be justified”

britishparking.co.uk/write/bpa_code_of_practice_2012_version_1_october_2012.PDF

I am deeply concerned about the fact that the BPA can't tell the difference between NTK stage and debt collector stage.

Finally just to recap so we do not waste more time on this, A NTK cannot add on extra costs, this is not debt collector stage 'as per the collection process' this is NTK stage.

Coupon-mad

Nice one!

messi1984

In reviewing our emails, we have found that a reply to your email was sent on 16th January, to which you replied on the same day. A further response to your email was sent on 18th January to which you replied on the same day. Below is the email chain.

Please note that at no point in my previous email did we refer to the letter you have provided as a debt processing or debt collection letter.
As previously advised, the operator (Parking Ticketing Ltd) has not heard back from the driver within the 28 day timescale, therefore they have passed the charge to a 3rd party company (Parking Collection Services), who have attained keeper details from the DVLA and issued a Notice to Keeper. When this is the case, the 3rd party company may add on their own charges, increasing the amount due, as per the collection process.
There has not been a breach of the Code in this instance and therefore we are unable to assist you further.
Yours Sincerely,

twhitehousescat

sort of fails on a couple of points

DEBT collectors are not allowed to access details from the DVLA (parking ticket related) ONLY parking companies or companies that are in a ATA , parket ticketing do not use the DVLA for access



clearly shows that DR+ accessed your details , for clarity Debt Recovery Plus Ltd also t/as Parking Collection Services & Zenith Collections

this shows that the operator had no intention of getting info direct and MUST have paid this company to do the work for them , this is thier costs , not costs to be added to the figure , and YES it was PCS/DR+ that issued the NTK not the operator