New generation parking charge for not using facilities

Boardrider1977

I was under the impression that since 2012 it doesn't matter who was driving. If the owner does not disclose the identity of the driver within 28 days the liability falls on the owner. Is this not correct?

KeithP

Boardrider1977 wrote: »

I was under the impression that since 2012 it doesn't matter who was driving. If the owner does not disclose the identity of the driver within 28 days the liability falls on the owner. Is this not correct?

No that is not correct... unless the parking operator has complied with all of the criteria specified in Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

A lot of PPCs still have trouble doing that seven years later.


I think this is explained in the NEWBIES thread, isn't it?

Coupon-mad

Do you think this bunch are capable of stringing a statutory sentence together?

http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/new-generation-parking-management-found.html

Boardrider1977

That part of the Act refers to BPA members. The charge the owner received was from an IPC registered company. Does this matter? Want to make sure before I submit anything? The IPC code of practice claims liability is transferred to owner. Hope this is wrong but again want to make sure.

Coupon-mad

Of course the 2012 Act was at the time only for the single existing ATA, the BPA.

The IPC didn't exist then.

The Act does NOT only apply to one ATA and not the other!

Full compliance is required, to hold a keeper liable. Of course. It's not a given!

KeithP

Boardrider1977 wrote: »

That part of the Act refers to BPA members. The charge the owner received was from an IPC registered company. Does this matter? Want to make sure before I submit anything? The IPC code of practice claims liability is transferred to owner. Hope this is wrong but again want to make sure.

I think you are mis-reading Schedule 4 of POFA2012.

Boardrider1977

So to confirm you think the keeper has a reasonable chance of avoiding any court action if the parking company is unable to confirm the identity of the driver?

KeithP

Boardrider1977 wrote: »

So to confirm you think the keeper has a reasonable chance of avoiding any court action if the parking company is unable to confirm the identity of the driver?

Possibly.

But you are the one with all the documentation.
Compare it with Sch 4 of POFA - there is a link in post #1 of the NEWBIES thread, or google will find it easily - and confirm whether or not it is capable of transferring the driver's liability to the keeper.

Coupon-mad

ONLY in cases where the PPC has not complied with the POFA wording and/or deadlines. And no, this doesn't AVOID court action - it's just a winning point if non POFA.

Boardrider1977

Ok will look closely tmrw but from what I have read so far it appears that they meet the criteria for transferring liability unfortunately.