NTK contains no discount info

Reue

If the NTK only specifies the full charge (£100) with no reference to the discounted charge on a windscreen ticket (£60) does that make it in breach of POFA 8 2 (g) - inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available;

Does this invalidate the NTK in any way and if so is it worth relying upon this fact in any communications back?

Thanks.

hoohoo

If you had a windscreen ticket, the discount period is now over

DoaM

Erm ... if the driver ignored the windscreen ticket and the NTK is attempting to transfer liability to the keeper, then any discount must also apply to the keeper. (As I understand things).

Regardless, it doesn't "invalidate" the PCN as it is merely an invoice which OP should dispute following the NEWBIES FAQ guidance.

waamo

A full account of what has happened so far might be useful.

Reue

hoohoo wrote: »

If you had a windscreen ticket, the discount period is now over

But if they are relying on POFA then they are trying to transfer liability to the keeper (rather than driver) who may not have seen/obtained a windscreen ticket.

DoaM wrote: »

Erm ... if the driver ignored the windscreen ticket and the NTK is attempting to transfer liability to the keeper, then any discount must also apply to the keeper. (As I understand things).

That was my understanding.

DoaM wrote: »

Regardless, it doesn't "invalidate" the PCN as it is merely an invoice which OP should dispute following the NEWBIES FAQ guidance.

Invalidate the NTK (and thus keeper liability) rather than the PCN?

DoaM

NTK = PCN to a keeper, so just a different form of PCN (Parking Charge Notice).

Not having a discount doesn't invalidate it, as we argue they're not valid anyway. A PCN is simply an invoice for an alleged debt. Read the NEWBIES FAQ and follow the guidance for whichever membership scheme this parking company is in ... BPA or IPC.

fisherjim

You don't say who the PPC is or if a NTD was stuck on the windscreen but the BPA COP states:

9.7 If prompt payment is made (defined as 14 days from the issue of the parking charge notice) you must offer
a reduced payment to reflect your reduced costs in
collecting the charge. This reduction in cost should be by at
least 40% of the full charge.

So as I see it it applies to a NTD only if by windscreen invoice, or if by ANPR to the NTK.

Obviously it's more woolly with the IPC.

Reue

fisherjim wrote: »

You don't say who the PPC is or if a NTD was stuck on the windscreen but the BPA COP states:

9.7 If prompt payment is made (defined as 14 days from the issue of the parking charge notice) you must offer
a reduced payment to reflect your reduced costs in
collecting the charge. This reduction in cost should be by at
least 40% of the full charge.

So as I see it it applies to a NTD only if by windscreen invoice, or if by ANPR to the NTK.

PPC is UK Car Park Management.

The driver had a windscreen ticket, and the registered keeper had a NTK 30 days later.

Redx

so it appears that the correct procedures were followed

I have never seen a case where an NTK was "invalidated"

people seem to look for this "invalidation" as if it was an official council pcn , where laws and regulations apply

this is an unregulated industry and all a private parking charge notice is is one thing

an INVOICE

these invoices do not follow any set format, nor are they vetted by officialdom and there is nothing that invalidates them , they are just a piece of paper demanding money for a so called "service"

the crux of the matter is what a PPC can prove in court , to a judge , only a judge can decide if a court claim is valid or not

if a PPC is relying on POFA2012 , against a keeper, then they must prove to popla or a judge that they followed the correct procedures, but many fail to do this and lose their cases because of it

POFA2012 does not apply to a windscreen ticket , but any NTK that follows such a ticket must be obtained , sent and received after day 28 but by day 56 following the day of the event (day zero)

if the NTK is compliant with POFA2012, then its "valid" in that it may be able to be enforced in a court of law (or at popla)

UKCPM are IPC members so popla wouyld not be available, but in theory the IAS would have to determine the same facts and decide on an outcome

failing any of the above does not "invalidate" an invoice, but it might make it "unenforceable"

Coupon-mad

Agreed. A NTK after a windscreen PCN doesn't have to offer a discount.

As with all UKCPM fake PCNs, this will be resolved/probably killed off when you have to defend a small claim, if they try. If there was a simple way to invalidate or appeal an IPC firm ticket, the NEWBIES thread would tell you about it.

There isn't, the entire industry is rotten. Challenge once, if you wish and then sit tight.

Reue

So I replied to the NTK with the template letter from the NEWBIES thread, they've responded with some irrelevant rambling and answers to questions I've never asked before then stating 'you have contractually agreed to...' despite the driver not being named at any time! How could I have contractually agreed to anything when I may not have even been there

Do I respond to this letter or are we in full on ignore mode now?