Should I fight this PCN?

skins7789

Yes, they are. Keeper was told that this was because once the keeper paid towards the PCN (even though this was from driver's bank account, but paid under keeper's PCN number), liability was admitted. And once liability was admitted, PPC could continue to pursue keeper instead of driver. Is this true?

Fruitcake

It really would help if you name the PPC. I can see no advantage in hiding it, and several possible advantages by naming them.

If the driver's details have been given to the scammers, then the scammers should issue them with a NTD. If the driver fails to respond, or denies being the driver, then the scammers can go after the keeper.

If the scammers have failed to contact the driver despite being given their details by the keeper, then complaints should be made to the DVLA and the keeper's MP. If the scammers are BPA members (but we don't know because you haven't told us who the scammers are) then a complaint should be made to them as well.
If the scammers are IPC members (but we don't know because you haven't told us who the scammers are) then there is no point in complaining to them.

Fruitcake

From the PoFA 2012.

9
(1)
A notice which is to be relied on as a notice to keeper for the purposes of paragraph 6(1)(b) is given in accordance with this paragraph if the following requirements are met.
(2)
The notice must—
…

(f)
warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given—
(i)
the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and
(ii)
the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver,

the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;


But, the scammers DO know the name and serviceable address of the driver, therefore the NTK fails to transfer liability to the keeper. The fact that they have not contacted the driver is their problem. The PoFA is silent on part payment, or who has made such a part payment.
It only mentions payment in full.

skins7789

Thanks, Fruitcake. That was my interpretation, too. But keeper was told otherwise by someone who should have been knowledgeable about this subject, and thus was concerned about the interpretation of PoFA 2012 in court.

PPC is PPS. On letters, they claim to be a member of BPA and accredited operator of IPC.

skins7789

Driver's details were provided within required 28 day period.

So complaint to DVLA, and will tell keeper to mention to MP when case worker is in contact - case was opened recently.

Just to clarify, were you saying that complaint should be made to BPA, as company is member, but not to PPS, since they are member of IPC?

nosferatu1001

THe scammers are, shockingly enough (;)) LYING TO YOU

If you ahve PROOF (copy of) that it was sent as "gesture of goodwill" then by definition there is no admission of liabilty,a nd as already pointed out above, POFA states that the Keeper CANNOT BE PURSUED once the name and serviceable address of the driver is knwon to the PPC

So your response to the LBC needs to be brief

- the name and serviceable address of the driver was given in the letter of X (or email, or online, however you did it) date; at this point, their ability to pursue the keeper ended.
- the payment of £20 by the keeper was purely as a gesture of goodwill in an attempt to settle the matter. Irrespective of the fact the keeper cannot be liable under law, by its nature a gesutre of goodwill imparts no liability on the offerer. To state otherwise is an attempt at misleading a consumer, and you require an explanation of why they made such a gross misrepresentation to a consumer.

You require a non-template response to the above points within 30 days, confirming the charge is withdrawn
Any atempted claim will be vigorously defended, and a coutnerclaim for harassment, misuse of data (to op - once they had the drivers name and address they are forbdden from processing any data about the keeper, as the keeper has no part to play any longer) in an amount no less than £500 wil beissued, and all costs will be claimed in full on the indemnity basis. An application (Fee £100) will be made to the court to Strike Out the claim as having no possibility of success against a keeper when the driver is known to the CLaimant, and as this is before allcoation to any Track there will be no costs protection available to your client. You will be aware that, due to the vexatious nature of any such claim, costs in excess fo £60 per hour have been awarded, and this is the rate you will claim at.


EDIT: There is no 28 day period to name the driver. If they state otherwise that is a lie
It is that you ahve 28 days to name the driver otherwise the keeper is liable UP UNTIL THE POINT the driver is named - as long as the driver is named BEFORE proceedings begin, ie before papers are filed at COURT, then the Keeper has no liability.

skins7789

Also, for now, since LBC must be taken care of what is the next step?

Does keeper have 14 day period to acknowledge receipt of LBC via reply form (as per another thread), or 30 days as per the LBC deadline?

I'm also confused about the 2013 thread: 'Parking - Letter Before County Court Claim (LBCCC) - Fight back! Guidance Thread'. I know this is old, and the PD has changed, so should keeper ask for revised LBC that follows the protocol? That is, LBC states that the reason for PCN is unauthorised parking, but fails to state what this actually is. Also, there is no mention of POPLA or other ADR, no mention of their evidence (although it says on the info sheet that after filling in the reply form, there is a further 30 days for the company and the keeper to discuss the debt, and how to resolve it, before the PPC takes keeper to court), and the claim for the added 'fee' was initially, ages ago, stated as one amount for administration fees, then later a different amount for legal fees, and now in the LBC is considered initial legal costs in one place and total debt recovery costs in another.

Does this LBC conform, and if it doesn't should I request one that does? Or should I simply reply ticking the box that I dispute the debt (and give no further information at the moment)?

waamo

Keep it simple. Reply with what nosfertu1001 has told you.

skins7789

Thanks for the info, nosfertu1001. Do I still need to also send the reply form saying that I dispute the debt, or just reply with a letter (or email?) with the info you suggested?

waamo

Just reply with a letter. No need to use their forms. Make sure it is headed as rebuttal to LBC.