NTK and compliance with POFA

maccecht

New here so be gentle. Recently received a NTK concerning parking on a pavement. The NTK as far as I can tell from the Newbies section must contain mandatory elements to meet the POFA regs 2012. I received one from UKPC which as far as I can determine does not meet these requirements and as such as a Keeper can I appeal?
It does not name the creditor nor does it offer early settlement discount but refers to paying the maximum fine. Can the resident experts tell me if my thinking is correct here?
I also found a post on Peppipoo entitled G24 which alleges the same thing in relation to naming the creditor

Coupon-mad

I also found a post on Peppipoo entitled G24 which alleges the same thing in relation to naming the creditor

Something and nothing. Sorry, IMHO they are wrong to even mention that.

I received one from UKPC which as far as I can determine does not meet these requirements and as such as a Keeper can I appeal?
It does not name the creditor nor does it offer early settlement discount but refers to paying the maximum fine. Can the resident experts tell me if my thinking is correct here?

UKPC usually use POFA versions.

If there was a windscreen PCN offering the discount a month earlier, then the NTK is the second notice and does not have to offer the discount. Not 'identifying the creditor' is not an argument IMHO.

So unless it's one of their weird ones talking about 42 days instead of 28 days till keeper liability, consider it a POFA NTK - and gently kick yourself for not appealing on day 26 to stop them even issuing a NTK.

So treat it the same as all UKPC PCNs and:

- complain to the landowner

- send the template appeal to get a POPLA code

- show us the signs as 'parking in the pavement' sounds like a prohibition, not a contract.

maccecht

Apparently a PCN was issued but it was not on the vehicle at the time of leaving [motorcycle] one assumes it either got nabbed or blew off. Their site shows a photo of it stuck on the shroud over the handlebars. Hence no knowledge of a PCN until the NTK arrived demanding I name the driver or cough up £100. The signs show pictograms one of which says no parking on the pavement.
This is what I am reading concerning Keeper liability.
the ticket was issued to the driver it may also say that the PPC may ask for details of the registered keeper of the car from the DVLA. Note that the PPC cannot ask for registered keeper details until 28 days have elapsed since the issue of the Parking Ticket i.e. after the period within which the driver is required to pay or appeal the parking charge.

The Notice to Keeper

Schedule 4 paragraphs 8 and 9 of the PoFA stipulates the mandatory information that must be included in the Notice to Keeper. If all of this information is not present then the Notice to Keeper is invalid and the condition set out in paragraph 6 of Schedule 4 has not been complied with. Failure to comply with paragraph 6 means that the registered keeper cannot be held to account for the alleged debt of the driver.

Which car the ticket relates to
What land the car was parked on
The period the car was parked
Advise that the driver is liable for the parking charge and the amount and that it has not been paid in full
State whether a notice to the driver was given either to the driver or placed on the vehicle and if so to repeat the information in that notice about paying the parking charge and when
Specify the outstanding amount of the parking charge and of the maximum additional costs they may seek to recover, and of the dispute resolution arrangements
Invite the registered keeper to pay the outstanding parking charge or, if he was not the driver, to provide the name and address of the driver and to pass a copy of the notice on to that driver
Identify the “creditor” who is legally entitled to recover the parking charge
Warn the keeper that if the parking charges remains outstanding after 28 days and the name and address of the driver has not been given, or otherwise known to the person entitled to the parking charge, that “creditor” will be entitled to recover the parking charge from the registered keeper.
Details of the discount for payment within 14 days, The Discount should be at least 40% of the full charge under the BPA Code of Practice (applies to BPA Members only)
Date of the notice

Coupon-mad

I am very familiar with the POFA and some of us followed the Bill through Parliament and pored over the details in 2012! Then we've dealt with that Act for years since.

Forget it. None of the above negates a standard UKPC NTK, which IS POFA compliant.

The signs show pictograms one of which says no parking on the pavement.

I know (seen their standard signs before, many times!). That's why I said:

treat it the same as all UKPC PCNs and:

- complain to the landowner

- send the template appeal to get a POPLA code

- show us the signs as 'parking in the pavement' sounds like a prohibition, not a contract

The_Deep

UKPC are well known fraudsters, read this;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11858473/Parking-firm-UKPC-admits-faking-tickets-to-fine-drivers.html

It would not surprise me it this was "ghost ticketing", i.e photographing a ticket on a vehicle, and then taking it away.

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/ukcps-were-banned-for-ghost-ticketing.html

http://www.appealnow.com/parking-tickets/ghost-ticket-scam-win-at-parking-adjudicator/

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

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.

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.

maccecht

I dont understand why the driver [not me in this case] gets the opportunity to pay a discounted rate and I the keeper go straight to £100 without the opportunity to pay less as the driver does. The ticket was not on the bike when the rider returned 20 minutes after it was allegedly put there and photographed. The rider is a resident of Northern Ireland and has gone back there. If I provide the riders details can the BPA chase him down as he lives in NI not England? Why does all the info say all mandatory information as laid out in the POFA 2012 must be contained in the NTK yet the advise on here says it does not as the standard UKPC NTK does not have "all" the mandatory info in it. Sorry if I am being a dweeb but this is a minefield if you are not legal savvy.

Fruitcake

This is the second UKPC PCN we have had today where the scammers have a piccy of the PCN on the vehicle but it wasn't there when the motorist got back to it.

It's almost as if some person or persons unknown has deliberately removed said PCN from the vehicle with malice a forethought.
Who would gain from such a jolly jape do you think? Who gains if the opportunity for the discount is lost?

The Driver being from NI is an interesting point. Its a shame it's not the keeper, but there may still be mileage in revealing their identity.
Wait to see what the more knowledgeable regulars have to say on this.

Please complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

Coupon-mad

I dont understand why the driver [not me in this case] gets the opportunity to pay a discounted rate and I the keeper go straight to £100 without the opportunity to pay less as the driver does.

Does it matter, since you won't be paying (maybe it's a good thing, as it brings more annoyed people here and stops them rushing to pay, like sheep!).

The rider is a resident of Northern Ireland and has gone back there. If I provide the riders details can the BPA chase him down as he lives in NI not England?

Name him and his postal address. They can't do anything as UKPC will not sue in NI.

Why does all the info say all mandatory information as laid out in the POFA 2012 must be contained in the NTK yet the advise on here says it does not as the standard UKPC NTK does not have "all" the mandatory info in it.

But it does include the wording it needs to. Pretty sure it uses the word creditor somewhere in it too, and if not, then it is blindingly obvious that the firm issuing the demand is the creditor, so that will not win a case and should not distract you.

maccecht

Spoke to brother mine and told him he got a parking ticket and agreed to supply his details to UKPC. As noted he lives i Northern Ireland so we will see what comes of it.