Worth going to court?

ironman-uk

Hi All,

i am a newbie here, but have read the article on the appeals, specifically the technicality route using the 14 day notice to keeper requirement. My wife was driving the car at the time, the notice was subsequently sent to me as the keeper of the vehicle.

Salient points are:

29/7/2017 Parking incident happened
20/11/2017 Notice to keeper arrived, stating £50 fine if paid within 14 days, £150 thereafter
29/11/2017 My wife submitted an online appeal, reply sent to her email stating a response within 35 days
18/1/2018 Received a letter demanding £150 as payment has not been received, otherwise no contacts since the online submission
20/1/2018 Wife sent an appeal in writing - signage at the entrance was obscured by building work, actually shown on their ANPR picture as she had to use the exit to enter the carp park. Although looking at google earth, I think that there were probably other signs elsewhere in the car park.
25/1/2018 Received a notice that the matter has been referred and POPLA number enclosed
26/2/2018 Wife has not respond to the appeal within the 28 days noted, but offers payment by post of original fine
2/3/2018 Original payment offer rejected, stating that time has expired to appeal or pay original amount, so we must pay £150
4/3/2018 My first involvement, send a letter stating that as they didn!!!8217;t issue the notice to keeper within 14 days of the incident, therefore is not valid.
9/3/2018 received letter stating that the appeal period has expired, so the 14 day appeal I have made cannot be considered.

Now I appreciate that all of the appeals, and additional letters we are receiving from their recovery representatives aren!!!8217;t legally enforceable without going to the small claims courts. So my questions is, whether my wife offering to pay the original amount, compromises our case if we go to the small claims to ask for it to be dismissed given that the notice to keeper was not issued within the 14 days required by law?

Any help/advice much appreciated

KeithP

The fourteen days you mention is only of importance if they intend to try and transfer liability from the driver to the keeper.

As the driver has appealed rather that the keeper, it seems highly likely that the driver has been identified.
This means that as the parking company knows who the driver is, it has no need to transfer liability to the keeper.

Thus that 14 days thing is of no relevance.


If the keeper had appealed at the offset, then this would've been an easy win for the keeper.

Who is the parking company?

Fruitcake

What is the name of the PPC? You can check on the BMPA charity website to see how likely they are to try court.

Did you give away the driver's identity in the initial appeal, like you have done in your original post. If the PPC don't know the name of the driver then you need to edit your post and refer only to The Driver and The Keeper.
At a quick glance the NTK was non POFA complaint so could easily have been beaten at PoPLA.

Nobody here will suggest you pay anything. Offering to pay anything less than the full amount will probably get you nowhere.

It is not a fine.

[Deleted User]

The 14 days is only a legal requirement if relying on POFA to transfer liability to the registered (keeper). It's perfectly possible that they could sue your wife.

If they come after you as the keeper, then it is potentially a defence, yes.

All the previous correspondence can be shown to the court, but you could argue the £60 offer is nothing more than a commercial settlement offer, rather than an admission of liability.

ironman-uk

Thanks for the quick responses.

Yes the identity of the driver was indeed known to them at the point that the first appeal was made, and on the subsequent written correspondence. The original appeal was on the grounds that the entrance to the site was closed due to building works, with signage clearly covered with some sort of cladding. Access to the site was via the exit. This is the appeal that they originally rejected.

The company in question is higview parking, the "debt collectors" are DRP.

Umkomaas

The company in question is higview parking

They won't take you to court. :rotfl:

http://www.bmpa.eu/companydata/Highview_Parking.html

the "debt collectors" are DRP

They can't take you to court.

Your question 'Worth going to court?' is totally irrelevant. It's not going anywhere near a court.

Coupon-mad

Please stop offering money to Highview, LOL!

You could probably make them fold if you send them the appeal from the NEWBIES thread that the keeper should have sent them in the first place (they would have cancelled, same day). Try it now.