ES Parking Enforcement - NTK over the 14 day window

BaileysNose

Im sure I will get told off as having not read something but have gone over guides and threads and done this before successfully and still not sure. But I would still appreciate the help so here goes. A relative has received a NTK from ES Parking Enforcement after failing to buy a ticket as the machine was broken.

It sounds like most appeals to ES and the IPC are a waste of time and advice is to appeal to the landowner which I will try or wait and ignore the threat letters from debt recovery.

There was no ticket issued on the day - the date of parking was 21st Dec 2017 and letter is dated 5th Jan 2018. Postmark on envelope is 10th Jan 2018. So over the allotted time allowed under the PoFA - my question is - does this NTK include reference to PoFA and is this a valid argument to get the charge thrown out before going to debt recovery? I think the answer is no but just need to double check...

NB - it wont let me post an image of the NTK? I have uploaded to tinyPic and have a link...

Redx

POFA2012 is not mandatory , but for an NTK to adhere to POFA it must follow all the rules in schedule 4 , especially on wording and timescales etc

if no windscreen ticket was issued on the day then it must arrive by day 15 and must contain the correct POFA wordings

otherwise it failes POFA (but may still be a valid invoice)

if it fails POFA2012, then the keeper is not liable but will still be harassed about it and the PPC will presume that the keeper and driver are one and the same person , so NO it wont be "thrown out"

the initial appeal should be made using the correct template

the IAS should not be used unless there are VALID reasons for doing so

nothing other than a cancellation will stop it going to debt collectors (who can and should be ignored)

the PPC has 6 years to issue a formal LBC or an MCOL from Northampton CCBC - these should NOT be ignored

Coupon-mad

my question is - does this NTK include reference to PoFA and is this a valid argument to get the charge thrown out before going to debt recovery?

No because the IAS will not 'throw it out' for you.

The IAS will tip the burden against you from the outset and 'expect' the keeper to prove within an inch of their life, with documents and Google location proof, work records/holiday flight tickets, etc., that they were not and can't have been the driver, otherwise the 'Assessor' (anonymous person paid for by the IPC...) will just say they assume the keeper was the driver so the POFA doesn't matter.

None of that would hold water in court. But it does at IAS...of course. Conflict of interests.

Debt recovery letters are a laugh; I've ignored loads re PPCs over the years.

claxtome

I would second what Redx and Coupon-mad have said.
I am not a fan of ES, personal reasons, so have subscribed to your thread and will help where I can.

NB - it wont let me post an image of the NTK? I have uploaded to tinyPic and have a link...

It is because you have not been a member long enough. (Need 10 posts I think)
Post the link in another post but before you click submit break the link by changing http to hxxp and a regular will post the link correctly.

claxtome

Any news/update?

The_Deep

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and another company have already been named and shamed, as has Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each year). They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

Hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned.

The problem has become so rampant that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers. Watch the video of the Second Reading in the HofC recently.

http://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/2f0384f2-eba5-4fff-ab07-cf24b6a22918?in=12:49:41

and complain in the most robust terms to your MP. With a fair wind most of these companies may well be put out of business by Christmas.