SABA - old INDIGO

piarella

Really just a quick one,

Some time ago in 2019 PCN was affixed to my car, 4 weeks later I (Registered keeper) received notice from SABA titled "NOTICE TO DRIVER/HIRER"

drive.google.com/file/d/1UZcyLEQADCUtbPdx2xo_P3ZCJ5cw2E2Q/view

As you can see from photo, it does say : "If you are unable to provide the driver's name and valid address and the amount remains outstanding after 28 days, the Creditor has the right to recover unpaid parking charges and any charges associated with recovery from the registered keeper as described under schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012"

I am really curious if this notice can be seen as a valid "Notice to Keeper" letter in the POFA terms or it could be easily defended if ended up in Court as non-pofa compliant one?

If that's the case , its just astonishing that after 7 years they still can not do it right.

Quentin

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/LXswtClUKAVx7Qh5-1dqQp-qbZxopwSyy6XYI3gqJhlEjbG0KclmeRhRGBsW6TEpUUBy0LY-DCHeDm-iy9Hw=w1366-h622


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Everyone is asked to read up on this in the newbies faq thread near the top of the forum before starting a new thread


Go there now to get an understanding of the game you are now caught up in and how to deal with this


You will see a link there (in post #1) which will let you check if your NTK is compliant with POFA

piarella

Thank you,

Well I have briefly read that thread and went through many cases, and to my understanding this PCN is not POFA compliant, as the Act clearly points out what conditions MUST be met.

To me it looks like they just twisted everything round only to say "Creditor has the right to recover unpaid parking charges ... as described under schedule 4 of POFA2012"

I really don't understand their logic, They could make it right but did clearly choose not to

Quentin

Did you check the requirements for compliance in the short time you were there? (They did say more than you quote!)

piarella

1. Notice clearly says its to Driver/Hirer not to Keeper
-therefore I could not even be interested in reading that letter and passed that to driver.

2. Even if it was "admin mistake" and was qualified as Notice to Keeper then its missing:
8(2)(g) / 9(2)(g)
inform the keeper of any discount offered for prompt payment and the arrangements for the resolution of disputes or complaints that are available;

at least that how I see it

KeithP

Is the vehicle a hire car, company car or leased car?

piarella

none of the above - its a normal car registered to private person ,and its the first letter received by Registered keeper.