NTK Technicalities

HeavyEvy

Hi Folks,

Two questions for the collective if you have time....

Received my NTK last week, been away with work so not sure when, but it is obviously backdated, although that's irrelevant for now.

The 'Formal Demand', as they call it, states that the vehicle was parked in a particular area. But the photos show it is clearly parked in a different area. In fact if you look up the name of the area it is over 3 miles away!!

Do you think this would be adequate to allow me to challenge things on a POFA Para 8 (7) or Para 8 (2a) technicality?

I've been following the guidance in the newbies thread. And my next step was to make an appeal online, but I have noticed the following text on the back of their 'NTK'...

"In the event that you wish to dispute liability for this PCN, within 21 days please provide your full name"..blah blah blah "...We will engage with the IAS Standard Appeals Process providing you comply with our internal appeals process as defined herein."

While I accept from all the evidence that the IAS is a sham kangaroo court I am surprised this PPC would refuse to adhere to the appeals process given that they are supposed to be AOS members.

And of course this PPC don't accept anything other than a letter. And their NTK has been backdated to only give me a short time to get this in...

Anyway, my question...Given that the current newbies advice is to appeal to the IAS once, using the online system, do you think there is value in sending a letter to the PPC to ensure they do then follow the IAS process?

My gut feeling is its not worth it if the IAS is simply a sham.

Thanks

Coupon-mad

Given that the current newbies advice is to appeal to the IAS once, using the online system, do you think there is value in sending a letter to the PPC to ensure they do then follow the IAS process?

The NEWBIES advice re IPC members is NOT to appeal to the IAS at all, only to the parking firm, once.

My gut feeling is its not worth it if the IAS is simply a sham.

100% correct, do not use the IAS.

Which parking firm, UKCPS?

HeavyEvy

Thanks C-M

Its UK Car Park Management Ltd

Apologies, I read this on the newbies forum...

In the case of CURRENT IPC AOS MEMBERS ONLY, we now advise to WAIT for a Notice to Keeper to arrive and then challenge once online or by email, as the KEEPER, not driver, using the template appeal for IPC members, as shown below.

I realise now that's appeal to the PPC once...Thanks

Coupon-mad

OK, appeal once then ignore them till you get the usual Gladstones claim, which is where you are 99% likely to win, if you stick around on this forum and follow all advice at court claim stage.

Winnable, winnable, winnable, just not at this stage, because the appeal is futile. Do it just to look reasonable later to a Judge - that's why we do it.

HeavyEvy

Coupon-mad wrote: »

OK, appeal once then ignore them till you get the usual Gladstones claim, which is where you are 99% likely to win, if you stick around on this forum and follow all advice at court claim stage.

Winnable, winnable, winnable, just not at this stage, because the appeal is futile. Do it just to look reasonable later to a Judge - that's why we do it.

You're a star, thanks for the help

Guys_Dad

If you can definitely prove that the area where you actually parked is NOT the area they claim, and you can prove this conclusively with photographs, then the PPC has given you proof by their own photos that you could not have been parked where and when they say.

That would be your main defence point if it gets to court but you could try it wit's "the driver" and not "I"ith the IAS, always remembering that it's "the driver" and not "I"

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.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, and a smaller 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 nearly always lose) and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P.

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.