Care Parking Metrolink PCN

eugine

Hi,

I'm having a difficult time thinking what to put in my rebuttal (not very good at this) and have basically used Redx's comments so far (big thanks). Would appreciate any critique.

Dear POPLA Assessor,

PCN Code: ********
POPLA Code: ********

I shall respond to the evidence pack provided by Care Parking.

Care Parking admit that they have not obtained keeper details from the DVLA under their KADOE contract.

They admit they have not issued an NTK to the keeper which means they have failed to comply with POFA 2012.

They admit that they have assumed that the keeper and driver are one and the same person.

They have failed to transfer liability from the driver to the keeper by failing to retrieve the keeper details and send the NTK after day 28 and before day 56.

In the photo evidence provided, there is no obvious signage that is visible from the vehicle.

I do not think they have proven that the land is not railway land and is not subject to bylaws.

The contract with Transport for Greater Manchester does not appear to name the landholder and I don't see any proof of TfGM owning the land. So there is no clear path from Care Parking to the landholder themselves. There is no evidence stating who the actual landholder is.

Having a rolling contract with TfGM does not mean that they have one with the actual landholder and if TfGM are an agent (3rd party) leasing the land then there must also be one with the landholder themselves.

If the landholder is Network Rail then bylaws apply and POFA 2012 does not apply. They have not proven who the driver or owner is and they themselves say that they have assumed that the driver and keeper are one and the same person without proving it; POFA 2012 does not allow for assumptions.

Kind regards,
eugine

Redx

seems ok to me, covers most or all the salient points , so give yourself a big pat on the back

wait for other comments if you can do so, but do not "time out" of the 7 day deadline imposed by popla for the rebuttal

email the rebuttal to popla before the due date , or sooner

then sit back and wait for the decision

eugine

I received the evidence pack email last week on 5th Sept and it said:

You have seven days from the date of this correspondence to provide comments on the evidence uploaded by Anchor Security Services.

Now the stupid question... does that mean the deadline would be midnight tonight?

Redx

could be , so better get it in quickstix

eugine

So I submitted the comments to the POPLA portal last night.

This morning I received an email telling me that a decision has been made and to check the portal.

So I did and... the appeal was successful!!!

Here's the "assessor's supporting rational for decision":

From the evidence the operator has provided, it is evident that the operator is pursuing the appellant as the keeper of the vehicle. As the driver of the vehicle has not been identified, the provisions laid out in the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA 2012) will need to be followed in order to transfer liability from the driver of the vehicle to the keeper of the vehicle. The evidence provided shows that the appellant appealed a notice to driver which was issued to the vehicle on 12 June 2017. Within their appeal, the appellant has indicated they are the keeper of the vehicle. In response to this, the operator has begun to pursue the appellant for the unpaid parking charge. The operator has not provided any evidence to show that a notice to keeper has been issued. As the notice to keeper has not been provided, I am unable to determine whether the parking operator has followed the correct process to allow it to pursue the keeper of the vehicle for the unpaid parking charge. There is no evidence provided to suggest that the operator has made a request for keeper details to the DVLA. As such, I must allow the appeal on the basis that the operator has failed to demonstrate that the appellant is liable for the parking charge. Accordingly, I allow this appeal.

Thanks everyone for your help! Redx you are an absolute legend, can't thank you enough :beer:, Coupon-mad you were absolutely right... it's a straight win with no NTK issued.

Again thank you, I will post it up in the POPLA decisions thread as soon as I can.

So happy it's over!!

Coupon-mad

As the notice to keeper has not been provided, I am unable to determine whether the parking operator has followed the correct process to allow it to pursue the keeper of the vehicle for the unpaid parking charge.

Hooray - they are dumb!!

Redx

well done m8

just goes to show that 5 years down the line they still cannot follow the correct procedures regarding POFA2012 , they even admitted their errors in their paperwork yet are so stupid and moronic that they keep repeating those errors week after week

pay peanuts , you get monkeys