Excel PCN - Questions about appeal - Wrong NTK details

Mitsos17

So, today I received my NTK PCN from Excel Parking. The reason is that the driver overstayed by 12 minutes and they are asking the usual amount of £100, reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days, which I think is too much and I have decided to fight it!

I have read the NEWBIES thread multiple times and have done a good research so far preparing my appeal, but I have some questions now:

1. According to paragraph 9.2(a) of the POFA 2012, the PPC has to specify among others the relevant land on which the car was parked at the day of the incident. In my NTK, the road address is correct, BUT the post code is wrong! Also, the number is absent, but I am not sure if the car park has one. Can this be something to my defence?
2. The NEWBIES thread states that: "Want to dig deeper? Check the compliance of your Notice to Keeper, if the PPC is citing 'keeper liability' under the POFA." The PPC nowhere mentions the POFA 2012 explicitly. Will this still allow me to invoke the POFA 2012 if I need it?
3. Also very important: I collected proof that the time of the ticket machine does not follow the British Summer Time (BST), but it is off by at least 2 minutes. Could I use this to prove that the contravention time can be invalid, as the ticket's expiry time is not accurate?
4. Finally (for now), from the pictures at myparkingcharge.co.uk, it seems like the photos that serve as proof were taken by a phone. There is no proof of ANPR and I could not see any ANPR cameras at the car park. How can this be valid proof of the contravention time? Because according to my previous point (3), a phone camera timestamp cannot be valid timestamp even if it follows the BST, if the ticket machine uses a slightly different time.

Thank you so much everyone in advance and apologies for my English, you are all doing an excellent job providing support!

Coupon-mad

Welcome. Your English is perfect, I would never have guessed it wasn't your first language from that opening post.

According to paragraph 9.2(a) of the POFA 2012, the PPC has to specify among others the relevant land on which the car was parked at the day of the incident. In my NTK, the road address is correct, BUT the post code is wrong! Also, the number is absent, but I am not sure if the car park has one. Can this be something to my defence?

Probably not worth bothering about.

The NEWBIES thread states that: "Want to dig deeper? Check the compliance of your Notice to Keeper, if the PPC is citing 'keeper liability' under the POFA." The PPC nowhere mentions the POFA 2012 explicitly. Will this still allow me to invoke the POFA 2012 if I need it?

It doesn't have to mention the POFA itself. It has to state the wording prescribed by the Act. VCS' current pseudo 'Notice to driver' (is it or isn't it) is neither here nor there, and someone should do a 'Whatdotheyknow' website public FOI request to the DVLA, asking for disclosure of all correspondence with VCS/Excel and the IPC (and any other party including within or outside of the DVLA itself) about this new 'myparkingcharge.co.uk' system and the validity or otherwise of the 'Notice to Driver' used.

So you could do that, it would be enlightening.

Did the NTK arrive within 14 days?

Also very important: I collected proof that the time of the ticket machine does not follow the British Summer Time (BST), but it is off by at least 2 minutes. Could I use this to prove that the contravention time can be invalid, as the ticket's expiry time is not accurate?

Yes - that is VERY important. Did you get a photo of the machine next to a phone showing BST? Because if it's unreliable then the ''overstay'' could well be under ten minutes and well within a reasonable grace period.

Finally (for now), from the pictures at myparkingcharge.co.uk, it seems like the photos that serve as proof were taken by a phone. There is no proof of ANPR and I could not see any ANPR cameras at the car park. How can this be valid proof of the contravention time? Because according to my previous point (3), a phone camera timestamp cannot be valid timestamp even if it follows the BST, if the ticket machine uses a slightly different time.

Agreed. This industry is shoddy and greedy and MPs called these firms 'cowboys' in Parliament the other week.

There is nothing to stop them using a phone but it does give you a lot of scope for defence, especially when you have evidence that the machine is 2 minutes out against BST and there is nothing at all to connect a phone to the machine's timer, could be another 2 minutes out...and then the driver's own watch/phone might well be the only correct timing and they would of course rely on that!

Mitsos17

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Did the NTK arrive within 14 days?

Yes it did. Still confused if this is legal, according to whether the initial yellow NTD to the driver is officially an NTD...

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes - that is VERY important. Did you get a photo of the machine next to a phone showing BST? Because if it's unreliable then the ''overstay'' could well be under ten minutes and well within a reasonable grace period.

Yes, I have access to a photo that was taken later on the same evening, showing the machine time next to a phone showing the "Current Local Time in London", according to timeanddate.com. The machine time is ahead of the phone's time by at least 2-3 mins. Phone's time is of course the same as the "Current Local Time in London" and all these are clear in the photo.

Also, there is no proof from the myparkingcharge.co.uk photos that the 'cowboy''s phone is in sync with the machine's time. Should I include all these in my appeal, or just keep it as proof in case it goes to court?

Coupon-mad

Still confused if this is legal, according to whether the initial yellow NTD to the driver is officially an NTD...

Me too. The DVLA stated to another person that 'The IPC has said this is not a NTD'!! Haha, so they believed the IPC?!

That's why I suggest a FOI request is overdue, asking the DVLA for the correspondence between them and the IPC and VCS/Excel or any other party of person within or outside the DVLA, about this specific 'ticket' which mimics a NTD.

Also, there is no proof from the myparkingcharge.co.uk photos that the 'cowboy''s phone is in sync with the machine's time. Should I include all these in my appeal, or just keep it as proof in case it goes to court?

In your case, with that evidence, I would be considering an appeal to the IAS as well (second stage) because this is unusual evidence that they will not be able to refute, and puts the ''overstay'' as unproven in timing and likely only 8 minutes, so well within any reasonable man's idea of a period of grace.

Mitsos17

Dear Excel Parking Services Limited,

Re PCN Ref No: XXXXX

I am the keeper of the vehicle with VRM XXXX and am aware of your purported 'Parking Charge Notice (PCN)' issued on XXXX. 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 and are they the landowner?
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, which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
4. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle and any other images captured as photographic evidence in support of this PCN.
5. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera or timer used to take any photographs or to record what is denoted as 'Contravention Time' in the PCN was synchronised with all other cameras and/or systems & machines.

I must inform you that I hold photographic evidence that the ticket machine's timing was not synchronised with the British Summer Time (BST) at the day of the incident (what is denoted as 'Contravention Date' in the PCN) but was ahead by at least 3 minutes. Therefore, I am to believe on a very strong basis that what is indicated to be the 'Contravention Reason' is invalid, as any 'overstay' occurred is well within a very reasonable grace period, according to International Parking Community's (IPC) code of practice, which you state to be a member of.

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 or have obtained 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, as seems likely based on my research) 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. Your aggressive business practice and unwarranted threat of court for the ordinary matter of a driver using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me. I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle.

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. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Name
Address

What do you think? Should I include the underlined bits? Also:

1. Should I include that the postcode under the 'Site Name & Location' field is wrong, as I say in my first post?
2. I copy-pasted most of my appeal from the NEWBIES thread, should I add/remove anything to apply for my case?
3. When is the best time to submit it?

Any feedback is welcome, thanks again!

Umkomaas

Personally, I'd keep all your powder dry for your appeal to the IAS. It gives less time for the IAS and PPC to discuss (did someone at the back shout 'collude'?) the matter to block any of your routes to success. Not that there's much chance of success at the IAS, but at least you do have some tangible evidence to submit.

Mitsos17

Umkomaas wrote: »

Personally, I'd keep all your powder dry for your appeal to the IAS. It gives less time for the IAS and PPC to discuss (did someone at the back shout 'collude'?) the matter to block any of your routes to success. Not that there's much chance of success at the IAS, but at least you do have some tangible evidence to submit.

So should I just sent through the regular IPC-member PPC appeal letter, without any of my additions?

Edit: I forgot to mention that the day the driver got the ticket was the day that we switch to BST. Could this be used to my defence? Also, after having read this post: hxxp://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=72408105&postcount=46, I think I should quote directly the IPC Code of Practice.

Coupon-mad

I would include the IPC CoP and the fact it was BST changeover day so their timings were possibly affected. Add them to the usual IPC appeal.

Mitsos17

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I would include the IPC CoP and the fact it was BST changeover day so their timings were possibly affected. Add them to the usual IPC appeal.

But could I state that the driver was confused with the time, because of the BST changeover (the ticket expiry time was late afternoon, which was almost dark the previous days, but there was still light that Sunday)?

Coupon-mad

No, because that puts the fault with the driver rather than the company.

Mitsos17

Dear Excel Parking Services Limited,

Re PCN Ref No: XXXXX

I am the keeper of the vehicle with VRM XXXX and am aware of your purported 'Parking Charge Notice (PCN)' issued on XXXX. 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 and are they the landowner?
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, which you contend formed a contract with the driver.
4. Please provide all photographs taken of this vehicle and any other images captured that you claim to be photographic evidence in support of this PCN.
5. Please provide proof that the timing of any camera or timer used to take any photographs or to record what is denoted as 'Contravention Time' in the PCN was synchronised with all other cameras and/or systems & machines.

I must inform you I hold photographic evidence that the ticket machine's timing was not synchronised with the British Summer Time (BST) at the day of the incident (what is denoted as 'Contravention Date' in the PCN) but was ahead by at least 3 minutes. It is worth mentioning that the XXXX(date) was the BST changeover day, so the correct timings might have been affected.

Therefore, I am to believe on a very strong basis that what is indicated to be the 'Contravention Reason' is invalid and so is this PCN, as any 'overstay' occurred is well within the 'minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a prepaid or permitted period of parking has expired', which is a direct quote of page 12 of the International Parking Community's (IPC) code of practice, that you acknowledge to be a member of:

15. Grace Periods
15.1 Drivers should be allowed a sufficient amount of time to park and read any signs so they may make an informed decision as to whether or not to remain on the site.
15.2 Drivers must be allowed a minimum period of 10 minutes to leave a site after a prepaid or permitted period of parking has expired.
15.3 The reference to 10 minutes in 15.2 above shall not apply where the period of pre-paid or permitted parking does not exceed 1 hour providing that the signage on the site makes it clear to the motorist, in a prominent font, that no grace period applies on that land.


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 or have obtained 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, as seems likely based on my research) 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. Your aggressive business practice and unwarranted threat of court for the ordinary matter of a driver using my car without causing any obstruction nor offence, has caused significant distress to me. I do not give you consent to process data relating to me or this vehicle.

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. I have kept proof of submission of this appeal and look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Name
Address

Any comments on my appeal before I send it through? The underlined bits are the parts I have added to the usual IPC appeal. Many thanks!