Zipcar PCN - I was "named as driver"

bobbybobbo

Note: This is a new thread on an issue already posted for the sake of summarising. I have now fully read the FAQ and many relevant threads so this time round I can be more concise.

My company hires a Zipcar for regular deliveries to Clapham Junction Station, London. Zipcar was issued a PCN by UKCPM for "exceeding maximum stay". Zipcar originally told me they will pay it and charge our account. As per advice given here I advised Zipcar to give my details to UKCPM as HIRER.

We received the letter from UKCPM, addressed to my employer's address but made out in my name. The letter says I have been "named as driver of the vehicle". However it also says "if you were not the driver of the vehicle, you should notify us of the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver and pass this Notice on to the driver".

I have also now been notified by Zipcar of 2 more PCNs for the same contravention (same location, different dates), as this is a regular delivery stop for us. Zipcar have forwarded our details on to UKCPM, but I am yet to receive these letters. I have a feeling there could be several more on the way as well (perhaps 5-6 total).

This is my proposed letter based on Edna Basher's template.

Dear Sir,

Parking Charge Notice Reference Number: XXXXXXX
Vehicle Registration: XXXXXXX

I am in receipt of the above-detailed Parking Charge Notice ("PCN") dated 11th December 2018 and issued by UKCPM in respect of an unpaid parking charge allegedly incurred at Clapham Junction, London on 16th November 2018.

I confirm that I am the vehicle's hirer and keeper for the purpose of the corresponding definitions under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("POFA") and I write to dispute this PCN.

The PCN states that I have been named as "driver", but I make no such claim and no assumptions can be drawn. Without evidence that I was driving at the time of the alleged contravention I will regard this PCN as Notice to Hirer. I am not obliged to disclose the identity of the driver and this does not affect my liability in this matter.

Although the PCN states the reason for issue as "exceeded maximum stay period", it provides no evidence to support this claim. The PCN fails to state the length of time which the vehicle stayed and signage in the car park makes no mention of maximum stay periods (see attached photos). In the absence of any conclusive evidence in support of the alleged breach, I trust you will agree that it would be unreasonable for UKCPM to expect me to pay this charge.

Notwithstanding this, the PCN failed to comply with the strict requirements of Schedule 4 of POFA; in order that you may understand why, I suggest that you carefully study the details of Paragraphs 13 and 14 in particular. Consequently UKCPM has forfeited any right to claim unpaid parking charges from me as the vehicle's hirer.

Within 28 days please provide us with written confirmation of UKCPM's acceptance that it cannot and does not hold me liable for this parking charge and that this is now purely a matter between UKCPM and the driver.

Alternatively, should you choose to reject my challenge, I suggest that we utilise the services of a completely independent parking dispute resolution service. This does not include the IAS appeal service, which has been shown to lack transparency and independence from the IPC. A fairer option is the alternative offered by the British Parking Association, POPLA, which is transparent and has been shown to be independent.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Yours faithfully

Question 1: Any amendments to this letter? Particularly interested in feedback on text in red.
Question 2: Should I send this now (15 days after receiving notice in my name) or wait until 21 days have passed?
Question 3: Should I reference the other PCNs yet to be issued all in the same letter or deal with each one individually as and when the time comes?