Parking eye pcn - welcome break peartree oxford

Ruth_Tully

I wondered if you could advise me please.

I received the attached PCN issued 15/03/2017 through the post, based on ANPR technoloy. The car shows correct registration front and back of the vehicle clearly, so there is no dispute they got the right car. Parking Eye do not yet know who the driver is, but are demanding that the keeper - me - who they must have found out my address using DVLA, tell then who the driver is within 29 days from date of PCN issuance on 15/03/17 (13/4/2017) They claim they have the right to recover the charge from me personally as the keeper of the vehicle under para 9(2)(b) of schedule 4 of Protection of Freedoms At 2012.

I noticed that the PE are members of the BPA and must abide by POFA Code of Practice. I looked at the list of inclusions a Private PCN must include and some things appear to be missing. So I wanted your opinion about whether you agree with me or not that they are, or disagree that they needed to be included, validating the PCN. I have to assume that PE do use lawyers to look over their forms carefully to make sure they don't invalidate their own notices.

Under Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Failure to comply with paragraph 6 means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver. Looking down this list, against what is on the PCN, it seems that PE seem to have not included the second part of No.4 (amount not paid) or No. 6 in full (what maximum amount they seek to recover from me) and possibly 8 too, naming the creditor (although I assume that to be PE themselves).

---

1. Which car the ticket relates to
2. What land the car was parked on
3. The period the car was parked
4. Advise that the driver is liable for the parking charge and the amount and that it has not been paid in full
5. State whether a notice to the driver was given either to the driver or placed on the vehicle and if so to repeat the information in that notice about paying the parking charge and when (not mentioned at all)
6. Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover and of the dispute resolution arrangements
7. Invite the registered keeper to pay the outstanding parking charge or, if he was not the driver, to provide the name and address of the driver and to pass a copy of the notice on to that driver
8. Identify the “creditor” who is legally entitled to recover the parking charge (who is the landlord?)
9. Warn the keeper that if the parking charges remains outstanding after 28 days and the name and address of the driver has not been given, or otherwise known to the person entitled to the parking charge, that “creditor” will be entitled to recover the parking charge from the registered keeper.
10. Details of the discount for payment within 14 days, The Discount should be at least 40% of the full charge under the BPA Code of Practice (applies to BPA Members only)
11. Date of the notice

Do you think these omissions are valid enough to get the Notice cancelled? If so, when should I appeal to get it cancelled? Now, or after 14 days or after 28 days? I don't want them re-issuing a new, corrected one that is valid either to the keeper or driver.

I can't actually post the images, which is a real blow to getting any useful help. I hate Pepipoo so don't ask me to go there.

Coupon-mad

I don't disagree about the minor omissions but they are unlikely to be relevant. POPLA consider that ParkingEye Notice to Keepers are compliant, and TBH (except where PE send one late) they do say what they need to say, and are better than most.

But complaining to Peartree's Site Manager has worked before; someone called Shan has cancelled these more than once in the past:

Peartree.Finance@WelcomeBreak.co.uk

Is this merely about a few minutes overstay (less than 20 mins) or a driver resting/sleeping? If so, then I suspect WB might cancel it which is the first thing to try. Even if it's something else, still complain about the signs being impossible to read (unlit, if it was dark).

If not cancelled by WB, you actually have 28 days from service (receipt) of the PCN to appeal online and in general, ParkingEye do still drop out at POPLA stage most times, when they see the long template POPLA wording we recommend throwing at them at second stage.

Ruth_Tully

Thanks. I actually suspected that any omission from what was listed above would most likely be because that information is not required rather than the PCN being badly constructed. PE don't strike me as the kind of company to make those kinds of errors.

I will try your idea to talk to Welcome Break, but from what I gather they just ask you to revert to PE Appeals. If they do I think I will just cough up and just claim it against expenses. After all, it is an invoice and I was going about my business that day, not a private trip.

Seems to be the best course of action than fighting a lost cause.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

I will try your idea to talk to Welcome Break, but from what I gather they just ask you to revert to PE Appeals.

Not at Peartree.

I will try your idea to talk to Welcome Break, but from what I gather they just ask you to revert to PE Appeals. If they do I think I will just cough up and just claim it against expenses. After all, it is an invoice and I was going about my business that day, not a private trip.

Seems to be the best course of action than fighting a lost cause.

I vehemently disagree, not least because we almost NEVER lose any POPLA appeals. But mainly because that is sponsoring them.

DO NOT PAY, IT IS A MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE DECISION TO JOIN THEM/FUND THEM BY PAYING ''FOR AN 'EASY LIFE' SO DON'T LET THAT EVEN CROSS YOUR MIND.