Multiple PCN's arrived in the post

WIndsorweeds

''I have read the NEWBIES thread but cannot find anything specific to my case...my case is different''.

Hi

Apologies is this is covered on a thread but I cannot find anything easily related.

I recently received multiple PCN notices in the post on the same day from APCOA as the registered keeper.

Why the parking wasn't paid is a secondary issue here.

What I want to know is related to the delay in the notification, in this case it goes back 8 weeks. Should I be liable to pay the PCN's if there is a significant delay and also what about if multiple PCN's arrive on the same day? My argument is that if the notification was immediate, I could have identified any administration error from my side and not receive a future fine because the parking payment would have been correctly paid. However I now have 7 PCN's for various dates over the past 2 months and which could, left not paid, total £700 which I think is potentially large enough for the parking operator to chase. I was not aware of the issue so couldn't fix it.

Any help/advice gratefully received.

Thanks

WindorWeeds

pogofish

Get yourself back to the Newbies Sticky - This is absolutely no different to anyone else.

Thinking your "specific case" is somehow different is about the biggest mistake you could make as PPC's don't really do fact and people thinking they are special often tend to make mistakes in wording their appeals that don't help matters and can even leave them in a deeper hole down the line.

If you can't get a landowner cancellation for the lot, then submitting an appeal as the keeper for each individual ticket is going to be your next step.

Half_way

I use, or the driver uses?
very important not to give any clues as to the driver with railway land.
i parked gives a clue, I believe the driver parked/visited didn't give anything away.
.Start again with a new username after reading the sticky

Coupon-mad

Should I be liable to pay the PCN's if there is a significant delay and also what about if multiple PCN's arrive on the same day?

Nope, the keeper isn't liable (whenever the PCNs arrived!) which is why you appeal as KEEPER and do not say who was driving.

Indigo case? Easy to appeal, just do each one as per the NEWBIES thread and follow what this person did in the tick boxes, this link even shows you how to word a - much longer - winning POPLA appeal:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5677856

At no point was any indication given as to the identity of the driver, the box was unticked which asked 'were you the driver' on the appeal form, and when asked to input these details, N/A was entered into the fields.

Do the same, win at POPLA, all cancelled.

WIndsorweeds

Quick last question on this. All of the NTK's arrived well outside of the 14 day window, as per Schedule 4 of POFA2012, 9 (4) & (5) in some cases nearly 7 weeks late. Is this therefore a nailed on 'void' for the PCN? I read on the thread that it's not guaranteed but when combined with alleging 'Keeper Liability' it is. How do I know if they are alleging this?
Thanks
W

WIndsorweeds

Going to use this letter with the addition on the statement regarding the NTK's being outside of the 14 day period. Is this OK?

13/7/2017
Vehicle registration number: XXXXXXXX
Dear Sirs

Re: PCN No.XXXXXXXXXXX

I challenge this 'PCN' as keeper of the car.

I believe that your signs fail the test of 'large lettering' and prominence, as established in ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis. Your unremarkable and obscure signs were not seen by the driver, are in very small print and the terms are not readable to drivers.
The Notification to Keeper alleges a contravention of parking on the date of 3/5/2017 however the issue of notice is dated 28/6/17. The POFA 2012 clearly states that:
(4)The notice must be given by—
(a)handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or
(b)sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.
(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended.

There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. You must either rely on the POFA 2012 and offer me a POPLA code, or cancel the charge.

Should you obtain the registered keeper's data from the DVLA without reasonable cause, 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,

DoaM

Did all the PCNs come in the same envelope?

You could contact DVLA and request info on how many times Indigo (or private parking companies in general) have requested your keeper data between X and Y dates. (The idea here is to check that they requested keeper data each time for each and every PCN - they must do so by law else they are breaching the DPA).

Coupon-mad

WIndsorweeds wrote: »

Quick last question on this. All of the NTK's arrived well outside of the 14 day window, as per Schedule 4 of POFA2012, 9 (4) & (5) in some cases nearly 7 weeks late. Is this therefore a nailed on 'void' for the PCN? I read on the thread that it's not guaranteed but when combined with alleging 'Keeper Liability' it is. How do I know if they are alleging this?
Thanks
W

It's a nailed on 100% win for a registered keeper appellant, regardless of whether the PCN claims to be alleging keeper liability. Whether they do or don't claim as much, they CANNOT hold a keeper liable.

The thing people screw up, is appealing as driver and chucking the entire win in the bin!

KeithP

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The thing people screw up, is appealing as driver and chucking the entire win in the bin!

And that is exactly what Windsorweeds is doing.

Windsorweeds, in post#3 you were advised to change your original post to avoid giving clues as to who the driver might be.
Why did you ignore that?