NTK (no PCN) & 2nd (POPLA) appeal

Mr_Crabbs

Could I get some thoughts on POPLA appeal after an NTK?

Situation:

Driver, an NHS nurse, parked at hospital in course of duties. Due to lack of parking and urgency of situation was forced to park on a double yellow line but vehicle carries a permit allowing this.

Returned to vehicle in around 10 minutes to find parking warden obviously preparing to issue a PCN. Driver explained circumstances, parking warden said words to the effect of 'ok, be on your way'. No PCN issued.

30 days later NTK arrived from PPC 'pay up, £85, etc. etc'. Four images of car on NTK, none showing an issued PCN. Looked into it on MSE site (though admittedly not this forum) and sent in appeal, referring to 'the driver' in third party only and refusing to name driver or to pay charge on the basis that the company's representative had released the driver, had not issued a PCN and that POFA required the NTK to be submitted in 15 days where a PCN was not issued.

PPC have refused appeal, but not concerned as I understand this is standard; so now at POPLA appeal stage. It seems to me to be a slam dunk as no PCN was issued so the NTK was outside the POFA time limit, but inevitably the 'what ifs' and doubts about POPLA's objectivity are causing concern.

Would be grateful for any advice. Thanks.

Redx

just use the usual popla appeal points , especially the POFA2012 ones and the Henry Greenslade comments about not tranferring liability from driver to keeper , late NTK issued etc

also include no landowner authority , poor and inadequate signage , any BPA CoP errors, POFA2012 failures etc too

should be quite a few similar popla appeals already wrote on similar lines, even if not for hospitals and even if not the same PPC

try a forum search for similar appeals already written , using suitable search words

the fact that the NTK was late as no driver pcn issued should kill this at popla, if the appeal is worded correctly , as a keeper isnt liable if the PPC failed POFA2012 (WHAT WE CALLL A "GOLDEN TICKET")

the PPC may try to say that a pcn was issued on the day and the NTK was sent between day 29 and day 56, but its their job to prove it

The_Deep

Have you seen this?

https://www.bing.com/search?q=nhs+parking+principles&form=EDNTHT&mkt=en-gb&httpsmsn=1&refig=e37fdeb1d4174cc9e5d440e834400adb&PC=ACTS&sp=1&ghc=1&qs=SC&pq=nhs+parking+principals&sc=1-22&cvid=e37fdeb1d4174cc9e5d440e834400adb&cc=GB&setlang=en-GB

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 they will be out of business by Christmas.

fisherjim

You should also be warned that on private property although landowners and PPC's copy DYL's, and other signs they have no legal significance or standing like on public highways, in fact PPC's interpret them however they want to, it's part of their scamming arsenal!

You weren't talking to a warden he was just an incentivised muppet that is told to say anything to avoid confrontation, and maximise profits.

KeithP

Has the nurse not complained to the hospital?

Mr_Crabbs

Thanks for your replies, and Redx, thanks for the pointers.

I had searched the forums (and, of course, read the 'newbies' thread) but hadn't come up with references to similar late NTKs - perhaps my searches weren't well phrased.

I also hoped to find, which I couldn't, some indication of whether the PPC's (Bri*****a) NTKs were correctly worded, as I'd struggled to tie up their NTK wording with the relevant section of POFA. Again, maybe my fault but I didn't come up with anything in a search.

Understood that the PPCs just use double Y as a convenient shorthand, but it seems to me this does go to fairness / clarity of notice as if they use double Y, they should expect people to put the same interpretation on it.

Similarly whatever the warden's (or muppet's) instructions, at the end of the day he was a company representative making a decision which must bear on the alleged contract...

I think the driver intends to complain but others making such complaints haven't had a result in the past (except for the senior consultant who threatened to resign!)

Redx

there are dozens of POPLA appeals listed on here for PE victims or not so SMART victims where an NTK has been issued late or not at all, the "golden ticket" ones where they failed the POFA2012 wording and/or POFA2012 timescales

I am sure that if a keeper uses one of those and adapts it accordingly it will succeed, plus I am also sure that this is all referenced in post #3 of that NEWBIES thread seeing as it comes up almost daily or weekly on here and has done for years

here is the quote for example

ALWAYS look at the wording of any PCN from ParkingEye to see if it is a 'POFA/keeper liability after 29 days' one or not. There are two versions - look on the BACK of your PCN! As long as you have not said who was driving in the first appeal, if you are lucky enough to have one like the ''golden ticket'' (nothing about POFA 2012 on the back) type of PCN discussed here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5684787

This shows a ''Golden Ticket'' (our phrase only!) back page (note no paragraph about the POFA 212):

http://i.imgur.com/ubQAZ8p.jpg

...then you *will* win your appeal using the template POPLA point about 'no keeper liability' from a PE non-POFA type PCN, followed by the template point about the appellant not being shown to be the individual liable (then unclear signs, landowner authority, and if applicable, no grace periods allowed, etc.,).

if you have a problem , I fail to see what it is

Coupon-mad

I also hoped to find, which I couldn't, some indication of whether the PPC's (Bri*****a) NTKs were correctly worded, as I'd struggled to tie up their NTK wording with the relevant section of POFA. Again, maybe my fault but I didn't come up with anything in a search.

We have LOADS of Britannia threads here right now (no need to hide, they are nothing).

People generally say recently that Britannia sometimes post these around day 21, with nothing about keeper liability in the wording. Check, you can compare it to the POFA para 9(2)f, it's really really (honestly) easy.

Mr_Crabbs

Ok, thanks.

plus I am also sure that this is all referenced in post #3 of that NEWBIES thread seeing as it comes up almost daily or weekly on here and has done for years

I perhaps hadn't given that the attention I should as it seemed to be specifically referring to ParkingEye throughout, as in the section you've quoted. As I say, not saying they aren't on here, just I wasn't finding them. I'll keep searching.

People generally say recently that Britannia sometimes post these around day 21, with nothing about keeper liability in the wording. Check, you can compare it to the POFA para 9(2)f, it's really really (honestly) easy.

Yes, I think this one came around day 30 with posting a day or two before. I'll be honest, I struggled to make what I felt was a good comparison with POFA, but obviously I'm just getting up to speed with things. I'll have another look.

Wasn't sure how liberal to be with information - I see people quite freely naming PPCs and posting their appeals, but also the cautions about PPCs reading these forums.

Redx

refrain from using the words "ME , MYSELF & I" then , same as we always tell people on this forum, that is the main caveat

so THE DRIVER and THE KEEPER are all that need to be said

the fact that any info may say Parking Eye is because they are a major player, but any laws like POFA2012 apply to ALL of them as far as a keeper liability is concerned

so even though there are dozens and dozens of parking companies, if a PE appeal fits even though its Britannia , use it and adapt it

dont get tunnel vision about the name of the PPC, use anything that supports your case, although ideally you search the forum for BRITANNIA popla appeals if yours is about Britannia, its easier to adapt one that contains 95% of the correct wording , although find & replace in WORD works well if its a different PPC

the main point I am making is find something suitable and as close a match as you can, then adjust it accordingly , because we cannot have hundreds of templates to try and fit all the scenarios and parking scumpanies , plus you would find it even harder to find the right one (wood and trees come to mind)

the drop down forum search box and suitable search words should easily find what you are after , especially if CM says they are on here (which they are)

if you are not using the search tool , then you are missing out

took me all of 30 seconds to use it to find this recent one

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5833372/britannia-parking-ntk-popla-appeal-help

note the comments in post #4 about point 2) (which is dead since the Beavis case in 2015/16) and what to replace them with , where and why

Mr_Crabbs

Thanks Redx.

Hadn't realised that the keeper should also be referred to in the third person. As the PPC NTK was directed at them rather than the driver, perhaps unfortunately they did reply in the first person (as Keeper), but the driver was just referred to as 'the driver' throughout.

Not sure if you are saying don't use first person on this forum, referring to use of the forum, either?

Not expecting a template for every occasion by any means, but now I've read more on the subject and understand better which key words to use the advanced search is coming up with some better (and very recent) results, including the thread you refer to above.

The decision's been taken to go for the POPLA appeal & I have my orders so I'll try to put an appeal together this weekend, and perhaps post it up (suitably anonymised and third person).

Thanks again