Apologies for yet another new thread

Coupon-mad

You got it! The 28 days does not run from the 'issue date'.

bergkamp

Anjistar wrote: »

So if the POFA says (under 4. 'Right to claim unpaid parking charges from keeper of vehicle"):
(4) The right under this paragraph may only be exercised after the end of the period of 28 days beginning with the day on which the notice to keeper is given.

And the NTK says "Failure to make payment within 28 days of the Issue Date of this Notice will result in the full charge being applied...(etc, etc)"

Does that mean it's not compliant?

Yes.... :dance:

bergkamp

But it has to be spelled out....

whiskeytoothpaste

Great news.

In addition, what potential bearing would an incorrect location have if it was on an ntk and potentially poc?

Umkomaas

whiskeytoothpaste wrote: »

Great news.

In addition, what potential bearing would an incorrect location have if it was on an ntk and potentially poc?

I’ve gone back right through this thread and can’t find anything relating to ‘an incorrect location’. Have I missed something? Can you point to it so that we can help the OP?

Or have you jumped in with your own agenda, when we asked that this thread remain the exclusive domain of Anjistar, who has already said (effectively) that the thread was running away from him/her because of others with separate agendas of their own! :mad:

Fruitcake

whiskeytoothpaste wrote: »

Great news.

In addition, what potential bearing would an incorrect location have if it was on an ntk and potentially poc?

You really need to post this sort of thing on your own thread, not hijack someone else's thread. All posts here must be to do with the OP's case otherwise it gets very confusing as to whose questions are being answered.

Anjistar

Hello,

I have an update.

I sent the template off, and I have had a fierce reply saying they reject the whole thing and the owner is still liable and has to either pay up or appeal to the IAS.

I'm not sure what to do next.

There is one strange thing in the letter. It says:

"We are registered with the ICO for the processing of data which relates to the enforcement and recovery of parking
charges and in respect to you this related to the matter of a Charge Notice (CN), Ref VCSxxxxxx which was issued
to a vehicle registration XXXX XXX on the date in question."

However, on the front of the yellow ticket that was left on the windscreen of the car it states very clearly " This is not a parking charge notice".

On the back it says " As a result a Parking Charge Notice may be issued to the Registered Keeper through the post".

Neither of these statements concur with the quote above, taken from the letter that was just received.

Thank you.

KeithP

That's an interesting situation, but in the meantime you would be well advised to remove that PCN number from your post.

You told us a Parking Charge Notice was issued to the Registered Keeper through the post arriving on 02 January.

Anjistar

KeithP wrote: »

That's an interesting situation, but in the meantime you would be well advised to remove that PCN number from your post.

You told us a Parking Charge Notice was issued to the Registered Keeper through the post arriving on 02 January.

Yes, it was. But it was issued (date on the PCN/NTK) on the 21st December, not 'on the date in question', which is presumably the date of the so-called 'offence', and didn't arrive until the 2nd January.

Number removed, thank you!

Anjistar

It is with great regret that I have to confess that I have caved in and paid up. They obviously offered a second chance at the lower amount, and I didn't have the courage to pursue the matter further and risk having to pay more. More information has come to light and I was not at all sure of my ground.

I believe that originally the driver relied on old Google street view data which showed minimal damaged signage, which has since been updated, and then failed to check when actually parking, it being late, dark and snowing. The car was actually there for four and a half days before being ticketed. Although the road was not obviously labelled as Private at the entrance, to be truthful, the signs were plentiful, well lit and legible. Had it been better weather, they would probably not have been missed.

Please may I thank all of you who took the time to respond to me and I apologise for not standing up to the big bad wolf!