PCN where permit not transferred to vehicle

Coupon-mad

Email is fine. This is no different from any other case.

You can see this is the usual approach, from the thread that deals with all the Successful Complaints About PPCs (it's linked in the NEWBIES thread).

Let us know when the PCNs are cancelled, but the rk may have to be persistent.

Cornerhog82

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Emil is fine. This is no different from any other case.

You can see this is the usual approach, from the thread that deals with all the Successful Complaints About PPCs (it's linked in the NEWBIES thread).

Let us know when the PCNs are cancelled, but the rk may have to be persistent.

How would you address the issue of who was driving the car and how to prove the occupant at the time is authorised to park there, albeit in another vehicle? This is the bit I'm unclear on.

Quentin

See #10 for advice on how to ensure the driver is not revealed by the landowner

Explain the authorisation to the landowner

Coupon-mad

Cornerhog82 wrote: »

How would you address the issue of who was driving the car and how to prove the occupant at the time is authorised to park there, albeit in another vehicle? This is the bit I'm unclear on.

Did you notice I said ''an OCCUPANT OF THE CAR'' in my reply?

Cornerhog82

Quentin wrote: »

See #10 for advice on how to ensure the driver is not revealed by the landowner

Explain the authorisation to the landowner

My apologies, #10 on newbies board?

Quentin

No. #10 in this thread

Cornerhog82

Quentin wrote: »

See #10 for advice on how to ensure the driver is not revealed by the landowner

Explain the authorisation to the landowner

Thanks. I've drafted a letter from the RK confirming they were not driving, referring to an occupant of the vehicle as being authorised to use the car park. I've included the PCN ref number in the letter, name of employer and car reg. Any other details to include or not?

thank you very much for all your help

Cornerhog82

Email sent from RK to the manager of the shopping centre. They have responded saying they need to determine if the vehicle of the RK was authorised to park there (no) permit was for another car.
They want to know the registration of the car that is authorised to park there - should the authorised car be disclosed to them?

Coupon-mad

Yes, you must.

That is fine and is not saying who the driver was. You could reiterate that the driver is the authorised employee but that they will not be named because the parking firm is not entitled to be told who was driving, under the applicable law. As such they must not pass on anything except the fact the driver was the person authorised under VRN xxxxxxx and you ask that they support your complaint and tell their contractor to cancel, please.

Cornerhog82

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes, you must.

That is fine and is not saying who the driver was. You could reiterate that the drive is the authorised employee but that they will not be named because the parking firm is not entitled to be told who was driving, under the applicable law. As such they must not pass on anything except the fact the driver was the person authorised under VRN xxxxxxx and you ask that they support your complaint and tell their contractor to cancel, please.

Great, I'll draft something to that effect. My concern here is that they are questioning whether the vehicle charged had a permit in place - when it was in fact their usual vehicle that had the permit.