PCN where permit not transferred to vehicle

Coupon-mad

I say the driver should appeal that PCN, as it's the first they heard of it.

Beanthere2020

Coupon-mad said:

I say the driver should appeal that PCN, as it's the first they heard of it.

Well having had some issues with my old profile/email not transferring over to the new system I have had to setup again so have only just got back to the forums.

So the debt collector letters have started for one of the unsuccessfully appealled PCNs. This relates to the original PCN ref that was sent to the RK, then appealed via POPLA, liability then passed to named driver and argued on POFA2012. Contravention was May 2019, PCN to named driver was eventually August 2019 after POPLA deemed the appeal unsuccessful. Driver has not appealed the PCN, and is now aware of the ignoring the edbt collectors letters stage - however, they are a little nervous about following it through to the point where they may be taken to court.

Initial view from the forums was that the submitted POPLA appeal didn't have sufficient points to sway POPLA based on POFA2012, so liability switched to named driver and POPLA appeal submitted based on POFA2012 and the PPC knowing the name of the driver - therefore contravening POFA2012.

However, now that POPLA have dismissed the appeal and the PPC/debt collectors are following this up - what would be the best route to take to fight the charges if it did go to court, if the driver can fight it?

Le_Kirk

Back to the NEWBIE sticky, second post and follow the links to the 17 pre-written defences you will find there.  Select the defence that most nearly matches your situation and adapt to suit.  If the claimant has added on spurious amounts (normally £60) then check out the Abuse of Process thread by beamerguy and the comment by Coupon-mad.  You could also read threads by CEC16 and basher52.

Beanthere2020

Le_Kirk said:

Back to the NEWBIE sticky, second post and follow the links to the 17 pre-written defences you will find there.  Select the defence that most nearly matches your situation and adapt to suit.  If the claimant has added on spurious amounts (normally £60) then check out the Abuse of Process thread by beamerguy and the comment by Coupon-mad.  You could also read threads by CEC16 and basher52.

Yes they've added an extra £60,funny that! Driver is concerned by cost of fighting the charge compared to amount they've been asked to pay. 

Coupon-mad

Driver is concerned by cost of fighting the charge compared to amount they've been asked to pay. 

I don't understand.  If you read any thread about court claims and what happens, you will know that there are no huge added costs (court fee = £50 if you lost in the end) and the £60 is unrecoverable anyway.  

99% of people here, win, when they spend a little time reading lots of other court claim threads and follow what everyone has done already.  With our help, posters win or claims are discontinued in their droves and there's no cost.

Beanthere2020

Coupon-mad said:

Driver is concerned by cost of fighting the charge compared to amount they've been asked to pay. 

I don't understand.  If you read any thread about court claims and what happens, you will know that there are no huge added costs (court fee = £50 if you lost in the end) and the £60 is unrecoverable anyway.  

99% of people here, win, when they spend a little time reading lots of other court claim threads and follow what everyone has done already.  With our help, posters win or claims are discontinued in their droves and there's no cost.

Of course. These are the concerns of the driver, so trying to allay them.
My perspective is ignore the debt collectors as advised, plan to defend a court claim if it comes or carry on as normal if PPC choose not to continue along the court route and essentially remove the need to pay anything. The other driver concern is over having to attend court if it came to that.

KeithP

Beanthere2020 said:

The other driver concern is over having to attend court if it came to that.

Why is that a concern?
Have a look at this short video...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93eoaxhzpU

nosferatu1001

The driver doesnt give two hoots, as they are not defending this - the KEEPER is, surely!

Beanthere2020

nosferatu1001 said:

The driver doesnt give two hoots, as they are not defending this - the KEEPER is, surely!

Unfortunately the initial appeal planned to submit to POPLA had little to argue to get a successful decision. Coupon-mad suggested a tactic whereby liability transferred to the driver by RK, then shortly after submitting popla appeal arguing POFA2012, as PPC in fact had the name of the driver so couldnt claim against the RK. there were 4 PCNs. All on the same basis. popla allowed 2 and rejected the other 2, which are now being chased by the debt collectors. So, the driver has been named. 

Coupon-mad

But that driver has never had a PCN or a chance to appeal to POPLA themselves?