Invalid NtK Shall I appeal to IAS?

kensiko

Just a fun little addition. Looking at the PPC cut and paste rejection letter this was noticed:
https://imgsafe.org/image/1aa7e602bb

They can't even be bothered to do a find/replace to change 'SITE NAME' to the actual parking location.

Umkomaas

Sums up the whole scam!

kensiko

Second draft now I understand the process a little more. POFA isn't being relied upon it seems reading the NtK as it is not mentioned. The main point now is if Excel are not relying on POFA 2012 then what legally are they relying on?


On 9th September 2017 I was the Registered Keeper of a <Make and Model> registration <Reg No>.

I was NOT the driver at the time of the contravention.

I will not name the driver at the time of the contravention.

The Notice to Keeper received on 2nd October 2017 does not comply with POFA 2012 Act Schedule 4 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted)
POFA 2012 Schedule 4 9(5) states a Notice to Keeper must be received within 14 days beginning with the day after parking.

The Notice to Keeper received specifies "Issue Date (posted): 28/09/2017". This is directly quoted from the Notice to Keeper. As the same Notice to Keeper states "Contravention Date: 09/09/2017" POFA 2014 has not been fulfilled.

Excel Parking cannot legally pursue me as the Registered Keeper as the Notice to Keeper does not comply with POFA 2012 and does not state that it does. Therefore I must assume Excel Parking are not reliant on POFA 2012 to pursue this Parking Charge Notice.

The question must be asked if Excel Parking are not relying on POFA 2012 to pursue this Parking Charge Notice against me as Registered Keeper then what legally are they relying on apart from "we may pursue you (the Keeper) on the assumption you were the driver"?

If Excel Parking intend to pursue me as Registered Keeper on an "assumption you were the driver" the onus is on Excel Parking to prove I, the Registered Keeper was driving on the contravention date.

As the Registered Keeper of this vehicle on the contravention date I cannot legally be held responsible for this parking charge when I was not the driver and therefore did not enter a contract with Excel Parking.

bergkamp

I would have the sentence;

' I was NOT the driver at the time of the event' ,

Nice and clear, on its own line, so that they will have to call you a liar if they presume you were the driver...

What they will probably say, is that you have not provided any evidence that you were not the driver!

kensiko

Thanks for the advice, that is a good point so the draft has been edited slightly.

In a case such as this would it not be correct that the onus is on the PPC to prove who the driver was? I could provide evidence the Registered Keeper was not the driver but is that my responsibility?

bergkamp

kensiko wrote: »

Thanks for the advice, that is a good point so the draft has been edited slightly.

In a case such as this would it not be correct that the onus is on the PPC to prove who the driver was? YES I could provide evidence the Registered Keeper was not the driver but is that my responsibility? NO

This is the IPC IAS so don't expect any fair or rational treatment....

kensiko

bergkamp wrote: »

This is the IPC IAS so don't expect any fair or rational treatment....

The truest thing ever said on a forum

Umkomaas

To even cause the IAS assessor to divert his eyes away from the PPC’s case, you would need to prove categorically and irrefutably that you were not the driver on the day. Like, on the day you were mid-Atlantic on a world cruise, with a copy of your ticket (maybe even a signed witness statement from no one below Captain status) - you get my drift?

Otherwise they will quote Elliott v Loake and/or balance of probabilities that the keeper was the driver.

You seem to have shifted your position a bit on whether Excel are pursuing you as keeper under PoFA. Over the past few months they have sharpened up their NtK to the point where we feel they are more or less PoFA compliant. Can you scan a copy of the NtK (both sides) and host it on tinypic, imgur, Dropbox or similar and paste the link here for us to look at?

kensiko

I will find the Registered Keepers photo on a log flume :cool:

Sorry for the confusion but I don't believe they are using POFA at all as I don't see it mentioned on this NtK, probably due to the fact that they already know the dates are not compliant?

I have attached images of the NtK for those more knowledgeable to check.

Page 1
Page 2

Appreciate all replies so far.

Umkomaas

We May pursue you (the Keeper) on the presumption you were the driver

They’re not pursuing under PoFA, so all the argument over dates of service of the NtK is void.

It’s Elliott v Loake, balance of probabilities stuff they will try to browbeat you with. Frankly, if you’ve no absolute proof you were not driving, then there’s no chance with the IAS.

From my point of view (although The Deep has always maintained an opposite take on appealing to the IAS), it’s back to default forum advice - don’t bother with an IAS appeal, ignore anything that now comes your way, other than a LBCCC or real court papers; come back if you get either.