incorrect VRN PCN superceded, Twice!

sooperspur

Hi all,

Really sorry to start a new thread but struggling to find the right route to go down having scoured the newbies thread and looking for some help.
At this time i have done nothing, probably wrong i know but there it is.
timeline of events

26/09/17, Windscreen notice left. Allegedly owner/driver left site, contrary to signage. VRM incorrectly entered
27/10/17 Notice to Keeper arrives. states parking charge date 27/10/17 with a different parking charge number stating it supercedes number on windscreen ticket but relating to same incident
03/11/17 2nd Notice to keeper arrives. states parking charge date 03/11/2017 with ANOTHER parking charge number stating it supercedes number on original windscreen ticket but relating to same incident
13/11/17 Notification Letter arrives. states parking charge number relating to NtK of 27/10/17. this details that it will be 14 days till they pass to debt collectors.

Presumably another Notification letter may arrive referring to the 03/11/17 letter....

the original PCN doesnt appear on their website now so cant appeal directly to that.
the photos relating to the incident are just photos of the car in a parking space.

they are BPA member

I found this on another site?

Dear Parking company,

I notice that you have reissued a ticket against this vehicle. As this reissued ticket was not placed on the windscreen or handed to the driver at the time it was reissued, then under the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, you had 14 days with which to serve the Notice to Keeper. This you have failed to do, so the Registered Keeper cannot be held liable for this ticket, and you should take the matter up with the driver.

Yours,
XXX

My understanding of POFA is pretty sketchey, just read it through a few times, but think this is valid.
They seem to be clutching at straws following an initial muck up?

Umkomaas

Which parking company please?

sooperspur

wow! what a quick response!

UKPC

thanks

Umkomaas

sooperspur wrote: »

wow! what a quick response!

UKPC

thanks

You must have opted for the ‘Super Service’ when you paid for our advice with your credit card details. :rotfl:

You could try that appeal and see what the outcome is. They may feel ‘bang to rights’ and cancel, or issue you with a POPLA code (where, with our help you can beat this), or it may go in the ‘too hard’ tray and they ignore it.

So send it off and see what results.

Are you certain they are only chasing one single parking contravention?

sooperspur

lol, some things are worth paying for...

yes, that car park, and the resulting loss of earnings to the supermarket attached, has been very much out of bounds since...

so you think thats a valid argument for appeal in the first instance? should i add it to the template or just leave it at that?

Umkomaas

I think I’d just bang that in. The other point to bear in mind is that the NtK (the first postal notification) must accurately transfer all the details from the NtD (windscreen ticket) in order for the PPC to be able to attempt to invoke keeper liability. Para 8(2)(c) of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 applies. So you might want to add this in as a further reason why they cannot invoke keeper liability.

You say you’re ‘a bit sketchy’ on PoFA, so here’s the relevant part of the Act which you should have a pick through. Might need a couple of reads to get the hang of it.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted

pappa_golf

sooperspur wrote: »

Hi all,

Really sorry to start a new thread but struggling to find the right route to go down having scoured the newbies thread and looking for some help.
At this time i have done nothing, probably wrong i know but there it is.
timeline of events

26/09/17, Windscreen notice left. Allegedly owner/driver left site, contrary to signage. VRM incorrectly entered
27/10/17 Notice to Keeper arrives. states parking charge date 27/10/17 with a different parking charge number stating it supercedes number on windscreen ticket but relating to same incident
03/11/17 2nd Notice to keeper arrives. states parking charge date 03/11/2017 with ANOTHER parking charge number stating it supercedes number on original windscreen ticket but relating to same incident
13/11/17 Notification Letter arrives. states parking charge number relating to NtK of 27/10/17. this details that it will be 14 days till they pass to debt collectors.

Presumably another Notification letter may arrive referring to the 03/11/17 letter....

the original PCN doesnt appear on their website now so cant appeal directly to that.
the photos relating to the incident are just photos of the car in a parking space.

they are BPA member

I found this on another site?

Dear Parking company,

I notice that you have reissued a ticket against this vehicle. As this reissued ticket was not placed on the windscreen or handed to the driver at the time it was reissued, then under the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act, you had 14 days with which to serve the Notice to Keeper. This you have failed to do, so the Registered Keeper cannot be held liable for this ticket, and you should take the matter up with the driver.

Yours,
XXX

My understanding of POFA is pretty sketchey, just read it through a few times, but think this is valid.
They seem to be clutching at straws following an initial muck up?

ticket on car = get info from DVLA after 28 days , NOT within 14 days

sooperspur

yes, but the ticket on the car has been superceded? and not by a ticket on the car but a notice to keeper? the original pcn is not active any more. thats why im a bit confused...

Coupon-mad

Maybe say this, choosing 'REGISTERED KEEPER in the UKPC dropdown menu and make sure it doesn't revert and default back to 'driver' if you edit the appeal at all, check before you submit, that it still has you as rk, not driver!:





You have inexplicably sent me two Notice to Keepers so I have made enquiries with the driver(s) and only one (wrong VRN) PCN was ever found, clearly void. It appears you altered the VRN, obtained my data from the DVLA and gave the 'charge' a new PCN ref and declared it 'supersedes' the void PCN.

And you have done this twice:

27/10/17 First NTK: this altered the VRN between PCN and NTK and gave a new PCN ref.
03/11/17 Second NTK: PCN date altered to 03/11/2017 with ANOTHER PCN ref, stating it supersedes the PCN, but relates to same incident.

Please explain in a non-template reply what is going on, and due to your error in the VRN, I suggest you now owe me a £25 admin fee to bring this matter to a close, in line with your own policy when drivers make a VRN error. I have had to waste time opening two NTKs, neither of which 'repeat the information in the PCN' and neither of which can be considered compliant with either para 8 or para 9 of Schedule 4. And I am now expected to appeal even though your non-POFA NTK cannot hold me liable.

The driver will not be named, so spare me your template fishing letter. POPLA code please, or cancel the PCN altogether.

sooperspur

Just as an update from many months ago. We finally ended up with 5 yes 5!! superceded PCN's relating to the original incorrectly issued ticket. It was a real struggle to keep up with it and actually cost an awful lot of time and energy dealing with them all but finally all of them were cancelled although they still insisted that they were all issued correctly! It has been about 8 months since the original ticket was issued and although it was never an option to give in i csn see how some may ultimately fold and pay up.
Dont do it! You can beat them, however long it may take!

Ralph-y

did you ever see this ......

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2018-02-02/debates/CC84AF5E-AC6E-4E14-81B1-066E6A892807/Parking(CodeOfPractice)Bill

''Rip-offs from car park Cowboys must stop''; unfair treatment; signage deliberately confusing to ensure a PCN is issued; ''years of abuse by rogue parking companies''; bloodsuckers; ''the current system of regulation is hopeless, like putting Dracula in charge of the blood-bank''; extortionate fines; rogue operators; ''sense of injustice''; unfair charges and notices; wilfully misleading; signage is a deliberate act to deceive or mislead; ''confusing signs are often deliberate, to trap innocent drivers''; unreasonable; a curse; harassing; operating in a disgusting way; appeals service is no guarantee of a fair hearing; loathed; outrageous scam; dodgy practice; outrageous abuse; unscrupulous practices; ''the British Parking Association is as much use as a multi-storey car park in the Gobi desert''; and finally, by way of unanimous conclusion: ''we need to crack down on these rogue companies. They are an absolute disgrace to this country. Ordinary motorists and ordinary residents should not have to put up with this''.

These are the exact words used, so you should quote them to your MP in a complaint and ask him/her to contact Sir Greg Knight MP if he wants further information about this scam.

you would be perfect to use as an example to the above ...

Ralph:cool: