patrons only PCN

anicecuppa

I've been working through the process described in the newbie thread, so at this point am waiting for the response to my SAR.  Will update as and when I hear more - especially if it looks like it is going to a hearing for which I will need some help to prepare!!!  Am very grateful for all the knowledgeable and helpful contributors on this board.

nosferatu1001

No, you are not waiting on that
You must be proactive
This is part of preparing. You need to understand whether they meet POFA2012 schedule 4 or not. This involves you using the forum as it is intended - as a resource for YOU to search and read
You cannot stick solely to this or even the newbies thread. 

anicecuppa

I appreciate that.  With respect, I'm trying to be proactive on a stage basis - since I have other work I'm trying to do too :-)  
Here are my current thoughts/qs re POFA2012 sch 4.
1. Several of the provisions refer to "the specified period of parking" which does not seem to be defined in the schedule.  My PCN did not specify a period of parking - it merely referenced a moment in time at which the charge apparently became liable.  There is no indication on the PCN of how long the car was there.  So this may not meet POFA 2012.  And the absence of any 'grace period' and the disproportionate amount of the charge given the time in the space would likely be part of any defence.
2. If I am reading 9(4) correctly, the letter arrived  more than 14 days after the incident.  However, 9(6) casts some doubt, since presuming 'issue date' is posting date then it will be presumed to have arrived exactly 14 days after, though according to my note on the correspondence it actually arrived 4 days later than that.
Other thoughts, based on the things I have read around the forum are that i) there was no contract; ii) the signage was totally inadequate.  The photos they supplied support this, as do a short video drive through I recorded some days later; iii) the charge was totally disproportionate; iv) the correspondence has been intimidating; v) the additional admin charge is unenforceable.

D_P_Dance

I agree with you that the signs that many of these companies put up are unfit for purpose, read this

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5972164/parking-eye-signs-oxford-road-reading/p1

nosferatu1001

1) Yes we know - no NtK ever has a period of parking, at best they have the time moving between two cameras. 
Dont mix up POFA and non-POFA arguments in the same topic. They are compelktely separate. Lack of grace is a defence to the underlying alleged breach of contract. Lack of keeper liability is a defence the keeper can use but says nothing about the validity of the underlying charge. 
2) If it was actually served 4 days later than the issue date, then your witness statement, which is evidence, will state as such. They will not, at any point, be able to evidence when they put the letter in the postal system, and if you have the envelope it may show it was actually sent second class - and the presumption in law on service of 2 days requires first class only. THis is the Interpretations Act and the idiots who drafted POFA, and copied from the IA, forgot to icnlude the requirement that first class post is needed for the presumption of service in 2 days. 

The newbies thread has a complete defence whcih mirrors the points you ha ve raised. 

anicecuppa

Thank you. That's all very helpful. I don't have the envelope unfortunately, so it will only be my witness statement which supports that.  I will be looking closely at the defence docs when I get some more time.

anicecuppa

Since I received the 'letter of claim' and made the SAR request, I have now had a response from DCB Legal basically saying I've got 30 days to make the payment. I'm obviously not going to pay that. But is my next step to wait (proactively, researching all the while!!!) for a court claim?  Their wording is "failure to make payment within the stipulated timeframe may result in a claim being issued against you without further notice".

Redx

Correct , there is nothing you can do to halt the process , it's under the control of the claimant and their poodles dcbl

You have your SAR , you should understand the issues involved , you should already know if your defence is a driver based Defence or a keeper based Defence and why , you should have gathered your evidence , such as Google images and photographs you have taken etc

You are awaiting a court claim pack from the CCBC in Northampton and know what to do with it and why and when

anicecuppa

Thanks. That's what I thought.  But I'm finding this process so demoralizing that I appreciate the confirmation.

beamerguy

anicecuppa said:

Since I received the 'letter of claim' and made the SAR request, I have now had a response from DCB Legal basically saying I've got 30 days to make the payment. I'm obviously not going to pay that. But is my next step to wait (proactively, researching all the while!!!) for a court claim?  Their wording is "failure to make payment within the stipulated timeframe may result in a claim being issued against you without further notice".

Yes it is a well rehearsed scenario from vermin and poodles.   Might make a good Disney movie ?

The thing is that DCBL have added a fake amount they are not entitled to.  They no doubt think you are a mug .
Show them you are not a mug and even at this stage, ask them what is their LEGAL AUTHORITY to add the fake amount.  They have NO legal authority which makes their claim very dodgy.  Whether they answer or not, it does not matter because if they continue with a foolish claim, you have a letter to show the court which of course helps a judge to make the right decision and rule for you.

If you don't do that, you have nothing to show a judge