Indigo Railway PN appeal

FarmerPalmer_2

Help, I'm new, so have read the newbies guide, and the various threads relating to the Indigo Railway PNs and how to appeal but am confused. I've received a letter from the PCN Admin Centre stating to be an OVERDUE PENALTY NOTICE TO OWNER on behalf of Indigo Park Solutions Ltd for an offence at a Railway Carpark on 30/10. There is no clear statement of how to appeal..... in tiny writing at the very bottom of the reverse of the letter it states

" for any queries relating to.... making an appeal.... please visit ipaymypcn.net.

When I type in the pn details into the Indigo website it says the timescale for appeal is over, and their general website says they don't refer to POPLA for railway appeals even though they are a member of the BPA. I've emailed customer support at Indigo asking for details of the appeals process, but should I also email this PCN Admin Centre?

The threads are confusing as to whether an owner can be pursued. The Bylaws say maybe and the letter from PCN Admin Centre says

" if the charge remains unpaid, our client is entitled to pursue you (the owner, I assume, as that's who this letter is addressed to).

Can they pursue me?

Are Indigo and their agent, this PCN Admin Centre obliged to follow best practice and contract law? The car was parked by the side of the road opposite the railway carpark which has marked bays. I've always thought that that area wasn't part of the car park as there's no signs saying you've entered the railway land around that side... the signs are way over to the left by the station itself. Even the ticket man at the booth said it was unclear when I asked him did the railway own the land where the car was parked!! surely they can't ticket a car where the breach wasn't made clear at the time of parking? Are they obligated to put up signs at the entrance to the car and around the site? Can I ask them to demonstrate to me how this was brought to the drivers attention before the offence was committed?

They allege their client can pursue a private criminal prosecution. The threads say Indigo doesn't have their right, what paperwork do I need to ask for to see if this is correct?

Guys, I hate this outfit..... their letter, which is the first I've seen is intimidating and highlights the !!!! things that could happen. Any help you can give me would be really appreciated.

Umkomaas

The industry is totally unregulated. The questions you are asking pre-supposes you are dealing with reasonable people and organisations - you are not.

Indigo can't pursue you if the land is covered by Byelaws - that is the domain of the Train Operating Company (TOC), and Indigo can't pass on your details to them as you are protected by the Data Protection Act. The TOC has only 6 months in which prosecute.

To be safe you need to drag this out slowly to get the 6 months to expire. You do that by asking some the questions you are firing at us, to Indigo. Do them one at a time, second class post, about 2 weeks apart. Any opportunity to ask a supplementary question from an answer, take it.

In terms of the uncertain nature/status of the roadway, contact the local authority and ask them. If it is a public road maintained by the council, this opens up an entirely different game.

Castle

Was there a NTD left on the vehicle?

FarmerPalmer_2

I think so, as there's one in the photo they have online. I haven't seen it. There are a few people who could have been the driver, and I haven't asked around

The_Deep

It is the will of Parliament that these scammers be put out of business. Hopefully that will take place in the near future. The Bill has passed through the HOC without hitch, and goes to the Lords soon. In the meantime involve your MP, the poor dears are buckling under the weight of complaints about these scammers. Read this one which I wrote earlier

This is an entirely unregulated industry which is scamming the public with inflated claims for minor breaches of alleged contracts for alleged parking offences, aided and abetted by a handful of low-rent solicitors. Is has been suggested by an MP that some of these companies may have connections to organised crime.

Parking Eye, CPM, Smart, (especially Smart}, and others have already been named and shamed in the House of Commons as have Gladstones Solicitors, and BW Legal, (these two law firms take hundreds of these cases to court each week), hospital car parks and residential complex tickets have been especially mentioned. They lose most of them, and have been reported to the regulatory authority by an M.P. for unprofessional conduct

The problem has become so widespread that MPs have agreed to enact a Bill to regulate these scammers.

Sir Greg Knight's Private Members Bill to curb the excesses, and perhaps close down, some of these companies passed its Third Reading in late November, and, with a fair wind, will become Law next year.

All three readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 6-7 hours), and published in Hansard. MPs have an extremely low opinion of the industry. Many are complaining that they are becoming overwhelmed by complaints from members of the public. Add to their burden, complain in the most robust terms about the scammers.

waamo

FarmerPalmer wrote: »

I think so, as there's one in the photo they have online. I haven't seen it. There are a few people who could have been the driver, and I haven't asked around

Why on Earth would you want to drop the driver in it? Legally they can only chase the owner. They presume the registered keeper is the owner.

Write to them saying you are the registered keeper. Ask them who is liable for the charge the registered keeper, owner or driver? All three could be different people.

Read their reply and try and make sense of it. I guarantee it will be gibberish and require months of writing backwards and forwards to explain.