Parking Charge on a personal leased car

savingisthegame

They haven't asked for anything, just what's on the ticket which was on my windscreen, and to pay by 2 weeks for £60....then £100 la la...28 days to pay.

I have put my full name and home address and details apart from mobile number, I used my own email address "doh"

Yes sent the template but obviously added where it says"Re: PCN No. ...................." adding the PCP number and my name at the end after Yours faithfully,.

Umkomaas

That’s all OK, apart from the PPC rubbish infesting your regular inbox. Also there is no way of knowing whether they will selling on that email addy.

Do they have a ‘Privacy Policy’ to which they provided a link and which you agreed to? Rhetorical question rather than one to go chasing after.

Nothing fatal in what you’ve sent off.

savingisthegame

Yea now you mention is shouldn't have used my proper main email 🙄 and im an IT technician lol.

They do have a privacy policy but not sure if i remember if it was on the form

savingisthegame

Do the PPC not read these forums? Surely they know when they get appeal templates they know where they come from? ��

nosferatu1001

Yes, but noone "wins" the first appeal anyway - unless its highview, and occasionally smart. Why waste effort on them? They created an appeals system which essentially autorejects ALL appeals, so why waste time on them?

Umkomaas

savingisthegame wrote: »

Do the PPC not read these forums? Surely they know when they get appeal templates they know where they come from? ��

But they don’t know who they come from in relation to posters on the forum. That’s why we always advise people who use their real name to change it to a pseudonym, to be careful they don’t drop identifiable litter (like PCN reference numbers, VRM and the like) throughout the thread and to redact their personal details and other identifiers in any images they link.

StaffsSW

nosferatu1001 wrote: »

Yes, but noone "wins" the first appeal anyway - unless its highview, and occasionally smart. Why waste effort on them? They created an appeals system which essentially autorejects ALL appeals, so why waste time on them?

As a slight aside, if we get a rejection to transfer liability on any of our fleet, I send in a letter with all of our usual appeal points to the PPC, suggesting that they transfer, cancel, or take us to court, and I no longer engage in POPLA or IAS appeals. I've got too many to deal with to jump through all of their hoops, but I've not had any new court claims raised against my fleet for a few months now.

I do let the vehicle operators know about the tickets, and that sometimes gives me another angle to add to the defence, but generally I just focus on keeper liability issues, rather than the specific circumstances of each event.

Of course I wouldn't recommend this course of action for any private individual!

savingisthegame

Thanks guys,

Do I need to still contact Hitachi? tell them i have a charge notice and that i am dealing with it?

StaffsSW

savingisthegame wrote: »

Thanks guys,

Do I need to still contact Hitachi? tell them i have a charge notice and that i am dealing with it?

Yes I would, and make sure that the Fleet Admin team are aware. If you have appealed as Keeper, in theory UKPC won't need to contact Hitachi, but UKPC are not renowned for playing by the rules.

Again, in theory, Hitachi should still transfer it to you if UKPC send a Notice to Keeper, but I think Hitachi VS pay everything on arrival and bill it to the driver.

savingisthegame

StaffsSW wrote: »

Yes I would, and make sure that the Fleet Admin team are aware. If you have appealed as Keeper, in theory UKPC won't need to contact Hitachi, but UKPC are not renowned for playing by the rules.

Again, in theory, Hitachi should still transfer it to you if UKPC send a Notice to Keeper, but I think Hitachi VS pay everything on arrival and bill it to the driver.

I read some other thread about Hitachi, and that they paid the ticket and charged the customer and it was a whole deal back and forth about legislation etc.. saying they should have paid it because it was a CHARGE not a FINE but they paid it anyway.