Airport charge notice help please

Aligoose

Hi,

I'm a newbie to the site and have read the newbie post and various other posts regarding airport penalty tickets but I'm still a bit confused about the best course of action so any help is appreciated.
I've received a 'charge notice' from VCS for stopping in the bus stop at Humberside airport for less than a minute.
The driver had already dropped off passengers in the correct designated car park and when leaving then pulled in momentarily due to needing to tend to their young daughter.
The driver was not sure whether to go down the mitigating circumstances route as they did not stop for a 'premeditated' purpose, did not leave the vehicle, left within a minute and needed to stop in a safe place where they caused no obstruction/danger.

At the time The driver was in a courtesy car. The driver was informed of the charge notice by the garage and have had a 'charge notice' (no mention of the word parking) sent to me from VCS following the garage providing my details . There is no mention of this being a 'notice to hirer' but would a notice to HIRER apply if it's a courtesy car? I have read the post regarding schedule 4 of PoFA and the requirements of sending the relevant documents has not been followed but I'm not sure if the driver is classed as a hirer, Also does it depend on whether the garage have provided the details as the driver or as the hirer?

Any help is appreciated.
Thanks

Quentin

PPCs aren't interested in mitigation


You were the "day to day keeper" at the time.


Follow the appeals procedure set out in the newbies faq thread


***EDIT your post to remove details of who was driving

Fruitcake

... and don't reveal who was driving, unlike you did in your original post. (Which you should edit.) Get into the habit of only referring to The Driver and The Keeper.

Aligoose

*Update*
The garage have confirmed that they informed VCS that I was the 'driver' when they provided my details to them.

Redx

they were correct in doing that except the garage have NO IDEA who was driving , they have assumed it was the keeper , ie:- YOU , and the KEEPER could be held "liable" for the actions of the driver (for all the garage knows , I could have been the driver so the garage cannot possibly know who was driving when the vehicle stopped at the airport))

edit post #1 to remove any hint of who was driving, saying THE DRIVER did this , THE DRIVER did that etc

then send the IPC template to VCS (who will probably reject it anyway, but send it anyway)

the person who had the courtesy car is deemed as "hirer , or better still lessee , for the time they had the vehicle (even if no money changed hands)

so you are deemed as lessee / hirer / keeper on the day

so you appeal as keeper, with the IPC template

but the only person who knows who the driver was , is the actual driver, which is best kept a secret

Aligoose

Many thanks for your replies.

So I'd be best to send this reply?.(obviously with the details of VCS in etc)

Dear {name of IPC member - only IPC members for this version!!!}

Re PCN number:

I am the keeper of the vehicle and am aware of your purported 'parking charge'. The driver will not be identified. I require the following information so that I can make an informed decision:

1. Who is the party that contracted with your company?
2. Is your charge based on damages for breach of contract? Answer yes or no.
3. Please provide photos of the signs that you say were on site and which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
4. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle.
5. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera used was synchronised with all other cameras and/or systems & machines.

Do not send debt collector letters and do not add any costs which would be a thinly-veiled attempt at 'double recovery'. I will not respond to debt collectors and to involve a third party would be a failure to mitigate your costs as well as deliberate and knowing misuse of my data.

Should you obtain the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause (e.g. if you do not fully comply with the IPC Code of Practice in terms of signage at this site, for example) please take this as formal notice that I reserve the right to sue your company and the landowner/principal, for a sum not less than £250 for any Data Protection Act breach.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle, whether you have already obtained it or not. I deny liability for any sum at all and you must consider this letter a Section 10 Notice under the DPA. You are required to respond within 21 days.

Redx

CORRECT, that is the template for IPC members

its your opening shot in this long running saga

if they fail to cancel, you follow the IGNORE MODE route for 6 years unless they try a court case (which they may do) , so an LBC or an MCOL which you must NOT ignore

in theory , airport byelaws apply for those roads and the AIRPORT have 6 months to try a claim at the magistrates court , so your first hurdle is 6 months when that "official" avenue "times out" . VCS cannot enforce road laws so have no business in doing so except to sc@m money from ignorant or gullible people

if you dont understand what is going on , find and read the hundreds of VCS JLA liverpool airport threads , plus parking pranksters blogs about JLA

and if you have time , read the recent 2016/2017 Luton and Birmingham airport threads, plus the many railway byelaws threads and blogs on here , on pepipoo forums and also on parking pranksters blogsite

then you will get an idea of the conflict between civil laws and byelaws that is going on

Quentin

Aligoose wrote: »

So I'd be best to send this reply.

Yes - (the dvla paragraph is redundant in your case), expect an "offer" of reduced charge in reply but ignore it!


(Typo in #7 - it's 6 months for magistrates, not years)

Aligoose

Many thanks for the clarification Redx and Quentin.

I'll remove the DVLA paragraph.
I understand from previous posts that mitigating circumstances are very likely going to be ignored but would it do any harm to add on the bottom of the above appeal something along the lines of this?

'Notwithstanding the above I would like to point out that on the date this charge refers to the driver had dropped off airport passengers in the designated car park and after departing the car park it was necessary to pull over momentarily. The driver opted for the safest place where they would cause no obstruction/danger/inconvenience/loss of business for the minimal amount of time they were present.'

Im sure it won't do much good (unless I catch someone on the right day) but would it harm any future process?


I was only thinking that in the very rare circumstances of this matter being taken to court I thought it best to put forward some mitigation/explanation at the start of the process to make abundantly clear how unfair the notice is.

Quentin

Mitigation is always a waste of time with PPCs - they are not interested, (and you may unwittingly give away who was driving if you vary the template)

Aligoose

If it was worded as I have above and only referred to 'the driver' I thought that I wasn't risking identifying the driver? I'm only thinking of including it so that I've acted fairly and honestly and given them every chance to dismiss the ticket if they were to argue the legality of their position in court.