pcn to registered keeper

Coupon-mad

Don't you have some blurry signage pics from the POPLA evidence pack, that might assist?

Pdmum

Yes, definately...the ones that had to be circled by the PC to stand out.
Looking back at those pictures some appear to have been photoshopped. Also datestamped more than 12 months before the contract start date!!!

Coupon-mad

Good so you can use them in evidence (don't use a readable one, not a close up).

Pdmum

Had another go at WS.



In the County Court at xxxx
Claim No. xxxx
Between
Xxxxx Claimant
and
xxxxxx Defendant

Witness Statement ( In support of Defence already filed)
1. I am xxx of xxxxxx and the defendant in this matter.
I deny I am responsible for this claim for the following reasons:-
2. I am the registered keeper of vehicle xxxx, I was neither driver or passenger in the vehicle at the time of the alleged incident.
3. I received a parking charge notice relating to the above vehicle . The reason being Failure to pay for the duration of stay. The duration was stated as being 2 hours and 18 minutes. ( XX1 )
The driver confirmed that parking had been paid for ,so I appealed to Claimant.
4. The appeal was rejected, although the claimant admitted at this point that payment had been made but there had been ‘ an overstay to a paid parking period’. I believed at this point there had been a deliberate attempt to mislead on the Parking Notice and that this was a scam. ( XX2)
Other reasons for the issue of the PCN have also been provided during this process, which is confusing and misleading . (XX3)
5. The driver had paid in good faith to park. Time spent before purchasing a ticket and exit time were more than covered by grace periods as set out in the British Parking Association Code of Practice.
The Claimant has mentioned that they are members of the BPA approved operator scheme but have chosen not to apply the applicable 2 Grace Periods as set out in para 13 of the BPA Cop (XX4)
(XX5)
I believe there is also breach of the ICO Code of Practice for Automatic Number Plate Recognition & Surveillance Cameras.
The Claimant has used the ANPR to calculate parking time as opposed to the only time available to the driver on the ticket issued from the Pay and display machine.
XX fails to properly inform people of this, and these are paying customers who will be reasonably relying on the tangible PDT issued by the machine, as that has actual 'parking time' on it.
XX make wholly 'automated decisions' to issue PCNs with no human intervention, clearly nothing is checked individually by a person.
The use of ANPR in this way, is purely in order to profit from genuine paying drivers whose tariffs do match their actual parking time, but simply could not complete the in/out actions in 10 minutes flat. And who never knew they had to.
The importance of the information on the Pay and Display ticket is highlighted in this case transcript
(XX6)
As opposed to being charged and held into by an unknown contract term, from the very second the vehicle was purportedly captured by ANPR entering and exiting the car park.
No signs explained at the site entrance (as cars pass in moving traffic), that the driver's time was being counted from that point and not from the payment at the machine. Why would a different time be shown on the Pay & Display ticket, if it is not the timing upon which a driver can fairly rely?
6. Proof of relevant documents have been requested, both during the POPLA appeals process and as part of the Pre Action Protocol and have still not been provided mainly but not limited to the Landowner Contract and images of the signage at the site at the time of the alleged incident.
7. The Claimants contractual authority to operate in the car park in which the alleged incident
occurred has not been proven as required by the Claimants Trade Association's Code of Practice B1.1
(XX7)
It is believed the claimant no longer operates at the site in question because there have been complaints.
8.Images of the signage at this site produced by the claimant have had to be circled to stand out. At the time of the alleged incident (at night ) and I believe in an unlit car park they would have been impossible to see. The images date stamp does not correspond with the contract start date. (xx8)
9. 2 Subject access Requests have been refused by the claimant as being unfounded and excessive. The claimant states that they would do a search if payment was made. (XX9)
A complaint was made to the Information Commisioners Office and the claimant was found to have not complied with its data protection obligations and that there should not have been a charge. (XX10)
Further investigation of the claimant by the ICO is ongoing in relation to the Code of Practice for Automatic Number Plate Recognition & Surveillance Cameras.
10. The Protection of Freedoms act is not fully complied with in regard to Keeper Liability. (XX11)
11. The claimant continues to mislead by claiming the Defendant is the Driver. The Defendant has not named the driver and the burden of proof rests with the claimant.
The vital matter of full compliance with the POFA was confirmed by parking law expert barrister, Henry Greenslade, the previous POPLA Lead Adjudicator, in 2015. (XX12)
14. It is my belief that the Parking Charge Notice was issued incorrectly from the start.
15.This unwarranted harassment and baseless litigation has caused distress to me and my family.


Do i need to use all of POFA 4 or just copy the sections which apply?

KeithP

Your point 10 seems a little short.

You might want to explain how they have failed to comply with POFA terms.

Pdmum

Does this seem better


10. The Protection of Freedoms act is not fully complied with in regard to Keeper Liability.
The Claimants states “ within 28 days of the notice” which is an attempt to put right the wording shown on PCN which says “If within 29 days”.
Both of these statements do not comply with the strict wording required by POFA and would mean that the Claimant is claiming keeper liability too soon.
The sum claimed from the Defendant ( if proven) cannot be more than would have been claimed from the driver. (XX11)

KeithP

Yes, that's better. You need to be prepared to explain the 28/29 days stuff if asked.

Every paragraph should be numbered.
Perhaps 5 should be broken down into smaller chunks.

Coupon-mad

Don't forget the statement of truth at the end and to sign & date it.

Pdmum

Do i need to use all of POFA 4 or just copy the sections which apply?



By this i meant do i need to submit all as evidence or just the highlighted sections

Coupon-mad

Just the highlighted bits in evidence - but have the whole of Sch4 in YOUR bundle on the day, in case the Judge wants to scrutinise it with a fine tooth comb.