PCN for not displaying Parking Permit

Toby_Carr

Hi All,

I was wondering if someone can provide me with some guidance. The dates and invoice amounts are not the actual, but very close. Was not too pleased with the love letter I got on 20/11/18; soured my festive period!


Got a PCN, send in the post on 20/11/18, and appealed using the template on the “NEWBIES” thread (Re PCN number: I dispute ...). I got a rejection email on 11/12/18 (looks like a standard response ref. valid permit not being displayed), and was asked to pay £50 by 25/12/18, or the full amount of £100 by 9/1/19.


The reason for my first appeal was to try to understand why I, as the keeper, was invoiced. It appears that the driver did not display the parking permit (which has been used by the driver for about 4 to 5 years). Not sure if this matters, but the driver was not aware of the small print, and I am planning to take some pictures tomorrow to gather some evidence.


I have a number of options:
1. Pay the full £100;


2. Call/email them, and say that the driver did have a permit, but must have fallen from the dash board, and possible settle for £25 or even £50;


3. Go through the POPLA appeals process, and risk an additional cost above the £100.


Just need a steer on what I should do next.


I don’t have much time, and want to make the right decision.

ps: I have been vague with the details, as don’t want to compromise my case ;-)


Thanks in Advance,


Toby.

Redx

to win at popla you need to win on a legal technicality (like contracts , signage etc), if you fail the £100 charge stands and the PPC could take it to court within 6 years

we would advise you to go to POPLA, and all the info you need is in the sticky thread for NEWBIES, near the top of this forum, please read it


you are unlikely to be able to negotiate with them


try and get the landowner to cancel it

The_Slithy_Tove

DO NOT call them - ever. Even an email is unlikely to be fruitful. They won't reason with you. Your only way is the formal process, i.e. POPLA.

As you were definitely not the driver, they will have to rely on keeper liability via POFA to be able to pursue you. Let's see the NTK, redacted of personal details, reference numbers and barcodes, but leaving dates. Also, if there was a windscreen ticket, then let's see that, too. Also need to know date of parking, date of receipt of NTK.

Forget "running out of time" in order to pay the discounted rate. The only deadline you need to consider is to get your POPLA appeal in on time.

Toby_Carr

Thanks for the prompt replies.


PCN was delivered by the postman, and no windscreen ticket was issued.


Date of parking was 21/11/18, and I took delivery 29/11/18; the reason for the PCN “was not parked in accordance with the T&C as per the car park signage.”


I will take some pictures of the signage and upload if required.


The wording in the notice is as follows, but tweaked a little:


============
We are writing on behalf of the creditor in relation to a parking charge. Your details have either been received from the DVLA under a "reasonable cause" request as you were the registered keeper of the vehicle specified at the time of the parking incident shown, or you have been nominated as the hirer/driver of the vehicle at that time by the registered keeper. A Parking Charge has been issued because the vehicle was Parked in a manner where the driver attracted a parking charge as brought to the driver’s attention via signage and agreed to by the driver when the vehicle was parked on land managed by our client XYZ.


The parking charge was issued following the use of a warden operated/monitored camera system, which identified the parking incident detailed in this notice. Please note that the period of parking to which charge relates is the period immediately preceding the time of issue. The charge has not been paid in full at the date of issue of this letter and the driver has 14 days beginning on the day after this notice is given to pay the parking charge at the reduce rate of £50.00. If payment is not received within this period then the full charge of £100 is payable by the driver no later than 28 days from the date of this notice.


We now invite you or the driver (if different) to make payment of the parking charge shown, or if you were not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the incident to notify us in writing, acting on behalf of XYZ, of the name and current serviceable address of the driver so that we can contact them for payment. Please also pass this notice to him/her without delay. If we do not receive the name and address of the driver within 28 days beginning on the day after this notice is given then if the charge is still outstanding we will have the right to recover payment from the keeper and we will also pass the case to a debt collector where further costs may be added.
=============

Thanks again.

Toby_Carr

[FONT=&quot]I submitted the appeal yesterday evening, on the following grounds (mostly templated but adapted to my circumstances):[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]1) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]There are no clear unconstructive entrance signs for the regular entry. Signs in this car park are not consistent, prominent, clear or legible from all parking spaces. Furthermore, there is no marked parking bay(s) at the location, nor clear boundaries[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]2) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No Evidence of Landowner Authority - the operator is put to strict proof of full compliance with the BPA Code of Practice[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]3) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Vehicle Images contained in PCN: BPA Code of Practice — non-compliance[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]4) [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No Evidence of Period Parked — NtK does not meet PoFA2012 requirements[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Let us see what they come back with[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]ps: not sure how I managed to add the word [/FONT][FONT=&quot]unconstructive!
[/FONT]

Toby_Carr

[FONT=&quot]Success! looks like the operator did not respond or did not want to contest.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Like to thank all those who have contributed to this forum, taking time to put together the templates and offering advice.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Here is the email I got this morning, 22 days after I submitted the appeal:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"JD Parking Consultants have told us they do not wish to contest the Appeal. This means that your Appeal is successful and you do not need to pay the parking charge.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Yours sincerely[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]POPLA Team "[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Coupon-mad

Very glad to hear it!

The_Deep

They have wasted your time, now waste theirs, complain to your MP.

The whole industry is a scam, relying on threats of court, and the public's ignorance of the Law, A bill is currently before parliament which will regulate the scammers, many of whom are ex-clampers.

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 Second Reading in the Lords this month, and, with a fair wind, will l become Law later this year..

All five readings are available to watch on the internet, (some 7-8 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.