PCN Vehicle Lease Company

KeithP

KDBJL wrote: »

Hi guys, i've had a response from POPLA providing evidence that has been submitted by the parking company which includes a copy of the contract with the landowner. I've been given 7 days to comment on the evidence. Do I need to make any comments?

Yes, you must make comments or you will definitely lose.

As you might expect, post #3 of the NEWBIES thread offers guidance on this stage.

Le_Kirk

Yes, you need to rip into it and counter anything they say that is wrong. You could point out where they have missed answering any of your points and say that since they don't deny it, it must be true - but only if it help your case. You only have 2,000 characters so bullet points.

KDBJL

Thanks everyone, I have drafted a response which makes the following comments. Sound ok?:

1. Agreement is not dated
2. The notice to keeper fails to comply with the Protection of Freedoms act (PoFA)
3. XXXXXX have failed to identify the driver of the vehicle.
4. The driver was not on company business
5. Poor signage
6. Evidence signage does not match the signage in the photographic evidence

KDBJL

By the way, they said that as we appealed by email, driver liability was established. Which annoyed me given that we appealed as the hirer!

KDBJL

Sorry last thing, does the comments need to come from the authorised signatory again? Last time I put the appeal in a letter, on Co letterhead and attached to the POPLA portal. However, the comments can be sent via email and I will going to put them in an email and send them over. I'm just wondering if this email needs to come from the authorised signatory or on letterhead again?

KeithP

You had seven days to comment. I fear you are out of time - by at least two days.

KDBJL

Thank you for your concern Keith. Actually I hate to be a pedant, but the deadline was yesterday.

However, the evidence that they sent was in PDF format and unfortunately corrupted. As I was unable to open it, I emailed explaining this and they emailed back yesterday with the evidence. As a consequence I have a further 7 days to respond.

Coupon-mad

KDBJL wrote: »

Thank you for your concern Keith. Actually I hate to be a pedant, but the deadline was yesterday.

No, in fact Keith is right - the deadline was Tuesday 23rd. The '7 days' are counted starting 'day one' on 17th when you got the POPLA email. In fact you only had 6 days...

You are lucky you got an extension.

Sorry last thing, does the comments need to come from the authorised signatory again? Last time I put the appeal in a letter, on Co letterhead and attached to the POPLA portal. However, the comments can be sent via email and I will going to put them in an email and send them over. I'm just wondering if this email needs to come from the authorised signatory or on letterhead again?

I would include the authorised signatory, yes, so POPLA can't ignore the comments.

My main comment as a company would be to point out: (this is 1216 characters):

The lease company have passed on our details as the hirer and the PCN has then been issued to us in an attempt to transfer liability to our company as hirer, but the PCN was not a POFA compliant Notice to Hirer and there were no enclosures as per para 13/14 of Schedule 4 so liability cannot pass to this company.

The evidence fails to show that the NTH included the statutory documents (because it didn't). Our company employee opened the envelope and we confirm there was just the 'PCN' masquerading as if it was a Notice to Hirer but failing miserably.

Also, despite the efforts of your so-called Sector 'Expert'(sic) there can be no assumption that whoever was driving was 'on company business' or 'on our behalf', given the (local shopping area?? hotel?? retail???) location and the fact this was on a Saturday, outside of our trading hours/days which are Mon-Friday. That presumption has been made in other cases, as we were shocked to read on the internet. It is clearly rubbish spouted by the BPA or a badly biased parking sector person with a warped approach that has no backing in law, so please spare us and realise that there can be no hirer liability outwith the POFA.

Fruitcake

Don't forget to complain to your MP about this unregulated scam.

A separate complaint from the company owner/CEO to their MP (whether the same or different MP to the hirer) would also be in order, stating how this sort of unregulated scam is having an adverse affect on local and national businesses.

KDBJL

Thank you for your useful comments, i'll add them to the response.

I can confirm that the deadline was in fact 24th as I first stated, We have two appeals with POPLA at the moment, the first evidence came in on 17th and the second on 18th, the first I had already responded to when I messaged on on 25th. Either way, the documents they provided were corrupted and not readable and so I was given the extension. I was trying to avoid stating online that there were two appeals ongoing.