Notice to hirer with no option for appeal

peacock403

Understood. Thank you

peacock403

I have received the response from SIP. I however think they may not understand schedule 4 of the POFA on the time limits or they've just decided to ignore it. Here's what they've said;

"We acknowledge receipt of your challenge to dispute the above PCN.
We obtain keeper details from the DVLA prior to sending out the notice to keeper letter which we did. As the vehicle is not owned by you the keeper provided us with your details to pass liability and named you the hirer/driver.
We have not breached the POFA and as a valid parking session was not purchased the PCN was issued correctly and the charge will stand."


They have gone on to ask for payment. Should I respond to them using mnavarra's template that explains in detail where they've gone wrong regarding POFA?

twhitehousescat

and as a valid parking session was not purchased the PCN was issued correctly and the charge will stand."


for what reason where the tickets issued?

StaffsSW

Our company gets this a lot from SIP - they assume that the hirer and driver are one and the same. It's clear that they just want their pound of flesh from someone and use bluster and subterfuge to get it.

I have lots of fun with them asking them to explain exactly how "ABC Fleet Ltd" could be the driver of a vehicle.

Have a look at section 13 & 14 of POFA here -
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/schedule/4/enacted - and see just how much they have failed to comply with. Para 14 2a is a common fail point, but specifically in your case it sounds like they have failed to comply with Para 14 5d and 7 a&b - any arrangements under which disputes or complaints (however described) may be referred by the hirer to independent adjudication or arbitration.

I find that when they get a robust reply explaining why they have not complied with this, they do tend to back off, and divert it to the fairly safe to ignore DRP process

peacock403

I think I will do just that - go into detail as to why they have not complied to the rules on. I will draft one and post here for further advice.

peacock403

twhitehousescat wrote: »

and as a valid parking session was not purchased the PCN was issued correctly and the charge will stand."


for what reason where the tickets issued?

Apparently that's their argument.

StaffsSW

Does the hire agreement name you personally, or your company/employers?

Either way - if it names you personally, that doesn't mean that you are the only person permitted or insured to drive the vehicle.

With your reply, don't forget to throw in some comment about Elliot v Loake not being appropriate, SIP have tried to level that at my company too - it's explained here if you havent come across it yet - http://parking-prankster.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/excel-parking-youve-been-gladstoned.html

peacock403

Agreement mentions me specifically. Thanks, I will add that case.

StaffsSW

Ok, so just remember to always refer to yourself as "the hirer", and you can allude to the fact that other people are permitted to use the car under that agreement, but you are under no obligation to name them.

peacock403

Here is my draft; your advice is appreciated.

Further to your letter regarding the above PCN, you have stated that you have not been in breach of the POFA and will therefore continue to chase me as the hirer of the vehicle. I beg to differ and wish to clarify my point.

To emphasise, I am replying as the hirer of the vehicle and this is not an admission to being the driver. Other people are permitted to drive this vehicle under this contract. There will be no admissions as to who was driving and no assumptions can be drawn. Please note that Elliot v Loake is not appropriate under these circumstances.

In order for you to demand payment from me as the hirer of the vehicle, you will need to comply to POFA. More specifically;

13(2) of POFA 2012...
"The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given!!!;

(a) A statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement;

(b) A copy of the hire agreement; and

(c) A copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement.

AND

Paragraph 14(2), (3), (5d) & (7) of POFA 2012:

(2) The conditions are that;
(a) The creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a notice to hirer), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper;
(b) A period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed; and
(c) The vehicle was not a stolen vehicle at the beginning of the period of parking to which the unpaid parking charges relate.
(3) In sub-paragraph (2)(a) the relevant period is the period of 21 days beginning with the day after that on which the documents required by paragraph 13(2) are given to the creditor.
(5) The notice to hirer must!!!8212;
(d) inform the hirer of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available;
(7) In sub-paragraph (5)(d) the reference to arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints includes!!!8212;
(a) any procedures offered by the creditor for dealing informally with representations by the hirer about the notice or any matter contained in it; and
(b) any arrangements under which disputes or complaints (however described) may be referred by the hirer to independent adjudication or arbitration.

As the hirer, I never did receive from you the documents as specified in paragraph 14(2a) within 21 days after receiving them from the lease/hire company. You were required to send these documents to me no later than 49 days after the NTK was sent to the hire company.

You should have sent the notice to hirer to me no later than 21 days from the date you received the hirer details 14 (3). Therefore I should have received the documents no later than 2 February 2018. As this has not happened, you cannot use POFA to assume keeper liability.

You were supposed to include a discount if the amount paid early which you failed and therefore have again failed to comply and can therefore not chase me as the keeper of the vehicle.

The notice to hirer I received did not contain any information on how I can appeal despite this being the first time I received this.

As you are unable to;
a) prove who the driver of the vehicle was at that stated time
b) hold the keeper/hirer liable for the charge because of the failure to comply to POFA,

You have no other choice but to cancel this charge. I therefore expect a notice of cancellation from you.