Minster Baywatch errors

tristramk

Hi all--


I have received a NTK from Minster Baywatch requesting a parking charge for a location in Wales.


I have read through the newbies page and searched several other threads, and as far as I can see the letter to this company (in blue font) is the first step.


However I have noticed a few possible errors in the NTK and would like suggestions as to whether these are things to mention in my letter:


1) The post code quoted in the NTK is not the same as the post code of the address quoted. The post code they have quoted is a residential street, the address quoted is a retail carpark. According to Google maps they are 0.3 miles apart.


2) The NTK does show 2 colour pics of car, but the colour is not mentioned in wording in the vehicle description given on NTK.


3) The wording on NTK reads: "You are notified under The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, schedule 4, that you are now required to do one of the following; Pay the outstanding amount, if you were the driver of the vehicle, OR; If you were not the driver, provide is with the full name of the driver of the vehicle along with their current address where a notice can be served, please note you are also required to pass this notice to the driver." I query the use of the word required.


Any advice on the implications of these and whether or not they should be mentioned in my letter would be gratefully received.


Cheers--

Coupon-mad

I think only point #1 is worth adding, as long as you don't say who was driving.

Have a look at the MB case won by a poster only this week at POPLA (in POPLA Decisions or found by searching the forum). The Assessor found in favour of the appellant because some signs said Bransby Wilson ran the car park and some (less) said Minster Baywatch did. That was the winning POPLA point in that case, and also in the past, MB signs have been woeful anyway and lost them POPLA appeals. So with MB, signs are key!

So I would send the usual appeal with a short point added about the location being incorrect (and say the difference is about half a mile, that's vague enough) and then if you are local or can go back, go and take lots of pics of the MB signs and any OTHER signs that cause confusion or ambiguity, AND any areas not signed at all, and any signs obscured by trees, etc (get a good angle, in your favour, the parking firms do!).

tristramk

I was just wondering whether making MB aware of their mistake with the post code straight away would give them an opportunity to check it out and alter it, and therefore if I'd be better off keeping this card close to my chest to use at the POPLA stage or beyond.


I remember someone telling me once of a parking notice they'd received being null and void because of an incorrect post code. Is this correct???

Coupon-mad

Null and void due to a wrong postcode...maybe for a real PCN from a Council. Not in PPC World's alternative book of 'rules' to suit them (i.e. the Code of Practice they wrote).

However, that's not to say the fact the location is wrong is not worth including, saying it is about half a mile way... (not 0.3 miles). Being careful NOT to get over-excited and write 'from where I parked...'!

tristramk

So if MB refuse the appeal and it goes to POPLA, will MB have had a chance to alter the postcode, or will the information on the original NTK stand?

Umkomaas

The original information on the NtK stands, but it may not be the showstopper you seem to be relying on. Lots of other appeal points on which to challenge the parking charge.

tristramk

OK, I figure my first step however is to approach the landowner directly. I'm a bit uncertain about this, so could someone perhaps direct me to guidance on the sort of things to say/not say at this stage? Does the same rule apply for instance about who the driver was?

Coupon-mad

Never say who was driving - complain in your own words but as 'keeper' and if talking about the parking event, say 'the driver' or 'we' did this...