We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Hearing end of the Month
Comments
-
What's the implications of the NTK not being sent within 14 days?
That they are non compliant? I can use this in my Skeleton argument?0 -
POFA sched 4 para 9 requires the NtK is SERVED within 14 days, to hold the keeper liable
Are they claiming the keeper is liable under POFA? Simple yes or no.0 -
Yes.
The claimant witness statement tried to defend that they are compliant with POFA Paragraph 9 2)a.
But they aren't. I'm currently reading the NEWBIE thread to see how being a lease car changes this though. Doesn't seem like it does. No ticket on windscreen, NTK wasn't received in 14 days, claimant defending their POFA compliance .0 -
The Claimant says they sent the NTK in time - did they send it to the Registered Keeper initially (ie not to the defendant who looks to be the day to day keeper not the registered keeper!)?0
-
If it is a lease car, then you need to be looking at para 13 and 14
They had 21 days to serve a copy of your HIRE AGREEMENt to you, showing you are liable. They almost certainly would not have done. No PPC ever does.0 -
Wasn't the defendants hire agreement .
The earliest NTK in the C witness statement was sent to the middleman by the looks of it.
My understanding of this agreement is:
Finance company > Hirer > the department > defendant.
The NTK went to the department.0 -
By the looks of it, It took 35 days for the NTK to be sent to the HIRER (Keeper of the car? not the day to day actual keeper, the defendant). All I'm reading in POPA is 28 Days max. It's quite confusing however, would this be worth putting in the skeleton argument? In the sense is questions the integrity of the claimant?0
-
The keeper is alwsys the day to day keeper. The hirer is from what you suggest a company.
It doesn't question their integrity. What tosh. What it does is show they cannot hold the defendant liable as the keeper
21 days for the notice to hirer not 280 -
So should this be mentioned in the skeleton argument then? With Schedule 4 to back it up?
And the reason it is mentioned is because it is another reason the defendant isn't liable?0 -
(5)The relevant period for the purposes of sub-paragraph (4) is the period of 28 days following the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice to driver was given.
Really confused with the above. Is this not 56 days?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards