Parking charge notice/fine - bought but wrong VRM

KeithP

Starwalker wrote: »

How does this look for first stage appeal, can someone please check:

One of the reasons for the template is that no-one needs to check a first level appeal.

Starwalker

Le_Kirk wrote: »

What was wrong with using the BLUE template to which you were pointed by C-m?

I did use the blue template, but II thought it would be better to put t it my own words without changing the substance to avoid the engineered so to speak cut and paste look. Please can you look at it once over?

Coupon-mad

Just send it, there was no need to alter it and we avoid spending too long on first stage appeals, hence the template, to avoid this sort of delay.

We are too busy with defences and POPLA appeals. No need to chew over first appeals.

Starwalker

Ok ill revert back to the template but keep my first sentence regarding date received.

KeithP

Starwalker wrote: »

I did use the blue template, but II thought it would be better to put t it my own words without changing the substance to avoid the engineered so to speak cut and paste look. Please can you look at it once over?

Another reason for not changing the template is that several PPCs will recognise it is from MSE forums and put it in the 'too difficult' pile.

Starwalker

Hi to all again,

So the initial appeal was rejected and I have a popla code. They say that they have evidence payment for parking was not made which is completely false based on just the photo of reg leaving and entering. If they disclosed what regs were entered the time just after entry in a 5 min window this would really clear it up. How can they be so reliant on limited technology like this and harass people for money when a human would have seen a valid and legitimate ticket paid for and displayed correctly!

I drafted the below appeal based on Batmans golden ticket appeal with the main two points regarding keeper liability and delivery out of time. I have not as yet included the standard points re signage, land ownership as will await responses. I have also not included that the driver did pay but had most certainly entered the wrong reg by accident and again will await replies -, but I would imagine this would then incorrectly allude to naming the driver.

I intend to attach this as a pdf along with their copy pcn. I don't have photos of their signs etc but can get them if necessary. Grateful for your help. Many thanks in advance!


Dear Sir or Madam,

On...., I received from ParkingEye Ltd. a parking charge to myself (as keeper of the vehicle) highlighting that the above mentioned vehicle had been recorded via their automatic number plate recognition system for “either not purchasing the appropriate amount of time or remaining at the car park longer than permitted”. There was no windscreen ticket on the vehicle - the notice to keeper was sent via post.

As the registered keeper I wish to refute these charges and have this PCN cancelled on the following grounds:

The Notice to Keeper does not comply with sub-paragraph 9 (2 & 5) and is not POFA (2012) compliant - ParkingEye’s own documentation (attached) shows that the event to which they refer occurred on ...... but they did not issue the PCN until ...., fourteen days later. That confirms it could not have been sent any earlier than (I have put the same date as issue-which is a Saturday)....., and further confirms, in accordance with POFA (2012), it could only have been ‘delivered’ by Tuesday ......... (17 days after the alleged event [or 16 days due to s.9(5) of time starting the day after]). It was however in fact actually received on Wednesday...... 18 days after the alleged event.

The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact the driver who may have been potentially liable for the charge.

Please see below for details:

1) This Notice to Keeper (NTK) is not compliant with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (POFA) due to the dates and the wording used.

Under schedule 4, paragraph 4 of the POFA, an operator can only establish the right to recover any unpaid parking charges from the keeper of a vehicle if certain conditions are met as stated in paragraphs 5, 6, 11 & 12. ParkingEye have failed to fulfil the conditions which state that the keeper must be served with a compliant NTK in accordance with paragraph 9, which stipulates a mandatory timeline and wording:-

’’The notice must be given by— (a) handing it to the keeper, or leaving it at a current address for service for the keeper, within the relevant period; or (b) sending it by post to a current address for service for the keeper so that it is delivered to that address within the relevant period.’’

The applicable section here is (b) because the NTK was delivered by post. Furthermore, paragraph 9(5) states: ‘‘the relevant period...is the period of 14 days beginning with the day after that on which the specified period of parking ended’’

The NTK sent to myself as Registered Keeper arrived 18 days after the alleged event (I've not said 17 which is what it would be if cons 9(5)). - see the attached PDF from ParkingEye with the ‘event date’ of ......and the issue date of ...... (i.e. issued on but not delivered by 14 days).

2)The operator has not shown that the individual who it is pursuing is in fact liable for the charge. At no point have ParkingEye provided any proof as to the identity of the driver of the vehicle; nor have I provided them with the identity of the driver (nor do I intend to).

I have contested this with ParkingEye with regards to their PCN reference....., but they have written to me to say I have been unsuccessful and provided POPLA ref.....

I therefore look forward to your consideration of this appeal and the attachments enclosed herewith.

Yours faithfully,


Have only slightly amended the template to fit. Please advise if you want me to put the dates in?

Thanks

KeithP

Have you read any of the examples of PoPLA appeals linked from post #3 of the NEWBIES thread?

Here's a link to just one of those examples:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p7ltb9rcr6zy7kn/Appeal_stage2_POPLA_ECP_draft5.pdf?dl=0

I'm not saying this exactly fits your circumstances, but just to give you an idea how one person has used the near template appeal points available to you in post #3 of the NEWBIES thread.

Coupon-mad

As I said:

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Easy one, copy any other ParkingEye Golden ticket POPLA appeal and you'll win.

You are being very brave though, if you don't copy a more thorough/longer one from all the ParkingEye Golden Ticket POPLA threads - i.e. one that at least also has the usual safety nets of 'unclear signs' and 'no landowner authority' in it too.

If you were my relative I wouldn't recommend you copy such a brief one.

All you need is to search the forum for the words in bold and not copy a single point ParkingEye appeal - it's asking for trouble IMHO.

Starwalker

Ok thanks.

Do I include that 'I' believe the driver did pay for the parking but has input an incorrect vrm, or is that opening a can of worms??

KeithP

Starwalker wrote: »

Ok thanks.

Do I include that 'I' believe the driver did pay for the parking but has input an incorrect vrm, or is that opening a can of worms??

If you are going to include something like that, perhaps it would be better phrased as:

I know the driver did pay for parking, but for some inexplicable reason, faulty keypad, sticky keys, etc, the machine recorded an incorrect VRM.