late NTK from County parking enforcement agency ltd

Quentin

damnckenna wrote: »

The newbies thread said to wait to appeal until the NTK arrived however.....

Yes - and the reasons for doing so are explained in the Newbies FAQ.


But you were advised it would nevertheless be futile!

SharkPond

so am i right in saying i ignore all future correspondence with them?

Quentin

As advised in the FAQ!


Ignore everything except LBCCA or court correspondence

Guys_Dad

damnckenna wrote: »

So I followed the newbies advice and waited for the NTK to appeal, I appealed the day it arrived but they replied to me this morning via email saying it was too late and i need exceptional circumstances for my appeal to count.
Is this time different a circumstance?

I don't understand this. You received the NtK yesterday dated 24th July and they have said that you are too late to appeal?? yes, you are too late to get the "discount" but certainly not too late to appeal.

I would wait a fortnight then appeal to the IAS as RK giving nothing away complaining that they have broken the IPC code by not allowing you to appeal to the PPC.

Surely, even in the murky world of the IPC/IAS this has got to mean a successful appeal????

Coupon-mad

The IPC APPEAR (let them protest otherwise...) to be letting their members pretend a keeper can't appeal. Again.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/72896659#Comment_72896659

So this will not win at IAS...

waamo

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The IPC APPEAR (let them protest otherwise...) to be letting their members pretend a keeper can't appeal. Again.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/72896659#Comment_72896659

So this will not win at IAS...

That warrants a complaint to the DVLA for sure.

Coupon-mad

In hand on the linked thread. Shocking.

SharkPond

They told me I need special circumstances to appeal at this stage, i sent them the IPC letter anyway.
I mentioned the lack of an appeal on the NTK

and the geography of the land was as such; the sign was attached to a wall with spaces beneath it, there was then space for other cars to drive past, a raise in the land and then a metal barrier like you see on A roads, then on the other side of the barrier was the car.

It was the genuine presumption the sign did not apply to that area of land because of the barrier

Umkomaas

Have you taken photos of the signage and car park layout? You need these should the PPC instigate court proceedings. As they have 6 years to pursue this, it will be somewhat pointless going back to the site in 2023 to take photos - take them now and keep them safe!

Coupon-mad

damnckenna wrote: »

and the geography of the land was as such; the sign was attached to a wall with spaces beneath it, there was then space for other cars to drive past, a raise in the land and then a metal barrier like you see on A roads, then on the other side of the barrier was the car.

It was the genuine presumption the sign did not apply to that area of land because of the barrier

Makes sense, a reasonable presumption.

Ignore them when they reject the appeal, as IPC firms invariably do. NO trying IAS, it assists the scammers, not consumers.