VCS - No NTK

Ormonde_2

Hi guys,

I have read through the newbie thread but still unsure on how to act and I'm struggling to find information to help the person in question with the situation.

An initial window screen document was found due parking outside the bays.

It refers the person in charge of the car to 'myparkingcharge.com' but the actual reference number is not readable (not due to weather, but just bad handwriting, neither the person in charge of the car or others who were asked could correctly find the reference number. Now in hindsight that could be different? Due to knowing the company.

So, the person in question awaited in the NTK.

Fast forward to 59 days later, a letter came through the post. 'Parking Charge Notice.. Final Reminder - Do Not Ignore'. In the letter it was stated that the notice to the driver had been posted (30 days from the day the original windscreen notice was provided).

Please note that the person actually received the letter a week later than 59 days and had until the 28th of December to appeal. It states that no appeals process since it is not within the time frame, but late appeals may be considered at their sole discretion and that must be completed by post.

Due to it being Christmas with limited time to put together an appeal and post it due to public holidays, an appeal is getting sent following New Year.

The person has had no opportunity to appeal before due to a complete lack of information.

The person is looking to appeal stating that no NTK has been received and no sufficient evidence was provided before they managed to get the keeper details from the DVLA.

Right now the charge has increased to 160 pounds (believe initially it would have discounted from 100 to 60 but cannot know).

I would kindly welcome some advice, on how to go about an appeal, if the above would be strong enough and after the most likely rejection, going forward from there.

All the best,
Ormonde

PS - Happy New Year

Umkomaas

If you can get an initial appeal off to VCS (NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #1 blue text template), send it to show you have tried to start the process of resolving the matter. It will be rejected (regardless of timescale) and you might be offered a further appeal to the IAS (but they may tell you it's too late. If offered, ignore that option, there is really no prospect of winning and the PPC is given extra impetus to pursue you.

Thereafter you ignore any attempt at debt recovery, but respond to a Letter Before Claim or real court papers and defend the case in court. Some help via the sticky (post #2), but note we are not a legal forum.

Have you tried a complaint to the landowner?

Ormonde_2

Thanks for the reply.

I will use the blue text template and respond by post to them and include the fact that no NTK was received. Not expecting anything from this, as you stated above.

Also agree with what I've read abut ignoring the IAS.

I could try and write a complaint to the landowner, its quite a large organisation. Worth a shot though I guess.

Would much rather it not go to court, but seems like its the only option, just annoying I've had no chance at all to respond due to them not sending a letter and the details being unuseable on the windscreen.

Kind Regards,
Ormonde

Redx

Ormonde wrote: »

1) An initial window screen document was found due to some illegal parking, the parking was not in the bays as per the requirements of the car park.

2) It refers the person in charge of the car to 'myparkingfine.com'

3) Right now the fine has increased to 160 pounds (believe initially it would have discounted from 100 to 60 but cannot know).

1) it would not have been "illegal", no laws were broken , it would have broken their parking rules, totally different scenario

2) I think you mean myparkingcharge.com ( no f word)

3) the F word again, there was no "fine" , just an invoice , nothing more , no such thing as a "fine" in this industry, which is why they do not use that word at all

the chances are that the default parking charge on the sign said £100 and was discounted by 40% down to £60 for early payment (the discount)

any extra £60 taking it to £160 are additional debt collector fees on top of the £100 charge and can be disputed if it goes to court

Redx

Ormonde wrote: »

Thanks for the reply.

I will use the blue text template and respond by post to them and include the fact that no NTK was received. Not expecting anything from this, as you stated above.

Also agree with what I've read abut ignoring the IAS.

I could try and write a complaint to the landowner, its quite a large organisation. Worth a shot though I guess.

Would much rather it not go to court, but seems like its the only option, just annoying I've had no chance at all to respond due to them not sending a letter and the details being unuseable on the windscreen.

Kind Regards,
Ormonde

yes, you appear to have understood those basics in this unregulated industry

this is why there is a new law going through parliament

https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/parkingcodeofpractice.html

Ormonde_2

Thanks Redx

Had a read through the bill, things will hopefully change.

I've updated the wording on the original post, I understand its an invoice not a fine and also looked up the last point about the additional 60 pound. Definitely something I will use if it comes to court, asking them to show proof.

I'll get the appeal sent out after New Year and keep the thread updated.

Should I also put any proof of the original windscreen notice (a scanned copy) in the letter? Or save it for later down the line?

Redx

the original windscreen notice is something they dreamed up as an interim "sc@m" and has been done to death on this forum over the last two or more years


to all intents and purposes, it is merely a warning and not a NOTICE TO DRIVER so I would leave it on one side and concentrate as KEEPER on the postal NOTICE TO KEEPER , assume that no official notice was left on the windscreen and as keeper the postal NTK is the first contact about it and is what you are reacting to

Ormonde_2

Hi, just an update.

The claim has been ticking along, I received the LBC and acted accordingly as per the Newbie Thread.

Got half of the information requested for in the SAR (no details of the contract between the land owner and VCS). They also have a letter which was apparently sent to my address, however, this was not received and will continue to dispute this.

I have now received the county court claim, filled out MCOL and issued the AoS. I have until 28th April to fill out the defence, This is WIP and will put up a draft early next week.

Umkomaas

Got half of the information requested for in the SAR (no details of the contract between the land owner and VCS)

You’re not entitled to that via the SAR process - a SAR is about personal information held about you and your vehicle’s VRM. A landowner contract would contain neither.

You can however ask for a copy of the contract as part of your response to the LBC - but you’ll have a job getting one from them!

KeithP

What is the Issue Date on your Claim Form?

Ormonde_2

Hi Keith,

Issue date was 29th March