PCN NCP fine - grace period ignored, incorrect registration number

wardpa

Hello
I've tried to read through the Newbies post and have read the BPA code of practice but am stuck with one thing.

A PCN ticket was issued in an NCP car park 5 minutes after expiry of the valid ticket, with first observation having been 2 minutes after expiry. My understanding is that a 10 minute grace period MUST be observed. Having been delayed, the driver was definitely back in the car after 7 minutes and took photos at 8 minutes, leaving the car park immediately afterwards.

However, my question relates to when I should submit an appeal - we have the notice stuck to the dashboard, but the registration number the NCP agent has recorded on the ticket is incorrect. Is it their responsibility to record correct information, is the ticket still valid and/or should we wait to appeal on the grace period grounds until the letter (and NTK?) comes through the door or just get on and appeal anyway?

Thank you.

Redx

I think I would wait for the NTK to arrive between day 29 and day 56, keep the paid for ticket and proof handy and also take pictures of the ticket as well (make copies , just in case)


when a postal NTK arrives, that is the time to appeal and include proof of the ticket, plus that is also the time to report them to the BPA for not following clause #13 of the CoP, a clear breach

wardpa

Thank you, Redx. Copies made already! So does the 14 day appeal period begin from the time on the windscreen ticket or the time that the NTK arrives...and if they have the wrong reg number and we don't receive an NTK, where does the liability lie?

Redx

no idea where the liability lies as yet, hence why I said wait for the NTK , because under data protection they need to be careful what they do

the POFA is quite clear, 14 days to get the NTK to the keeper (please read it) if it is anpr , and from day 29 to day 56 if a windscreen NTD was issued, as in this case

the date it happened is day zero , so the day after is day 1 and they have until day 15 following the event for anpr (and by day 57 for your scenario here), there is no ambiguity in this, its in the POFA law of 2012, which is easily googled and read

nosferatu1001

As abvoe
The periods above are deadliens for when you must have *received* the documents, as well. They cannot issue a documetn on day 56 and have it be compliant, as it is not deemed SERVED until 2 working days later.

The_Deep

It is not a fine, it is an invoice for the damage they allege your caused them by allegedly breaching an alleged contracts, a.k.a. as a scam.

In fact 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 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.