Private Parking Charge- received late

snappyandrew

Hi
I have read the newbies section and wanted to see if anyone had a view
I received a Parking Notice to the RK from Metropark Ltd. They are a member fo the IAS
the letter is dated 03/07/19 and the notice regards the car being parked on 29/03/19making it over 95 days after the parking

I have read that they have 28 days to send notice to the RK under POFA (schedule 4, para 8)

under the newbies section it says that
If the NTK arrives late, this does not make the PCN 'void' but it means there is 'no keeper liability' possible.

My appeal would therefore say that Metropark issued the Notice to Registered Keeper too late

Any thoughts on any action I can take? Or just pay up?

Redx

Only a fool would pay up as keeper when pofa protected due to that length of time

Appeal with the blue text template as keeper and add a paragraph stating that the claimant failed pofa and so as keeper you have no liability and the Driver will not be named

The_Deep

Pay up? Why, when you can make them payt for their hubris.

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams so complain to your MP.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

snappyandrew

ok. did the appeal just now. Will let you know how I get on

waamo

snappyandrew wrote: »

ok. did the appeal just now. Will let you know how I get on

We know how you will get on. They will decline your appeal.

snappyandrew

Funnily enough they did reject my appeal
saying
Note that you failed to follow the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012( schedule 4 paragraph 8 sub paragraphs 4-5)
Whilst we accept that the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is not relevant in this instance, the Criminal Case of Elliot v Loake 1983 Crim LR 36; held that the Registered Keeper of a vehicle may be presumed to have been the driver unless they sufficiently rebut this presumption. You have been invited to name the driver yet have not done so. Our Client, therefore, concludes it more likely than not that you were the driver.
We wish to advise that our client has followed the IPC Code Of Practise under section "5.1 The Notice to the Keeper must;".

So I guess the next stage is to go the IAS?

waamo

snappyandrew wrote: »

Funnily enough they did reject my appeal
saying
Note that you failed to follow the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012( schedule 4 paragraph 8 sub paragraphs 4-5)
Whilst we accept that the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 is not relevant in this instance, the Criminal Case of Elliot v Loake 1983 Crim LR 36; held that the Registered Keeper of a vehicle may be presumed to have been the driver unless they sufficiently rebut this presumption. You have been invited to name the driver yet have not done so. Our Client, therefore, concludes it more likely than not that you were the driver.
We wish to advise that our client has followed the IPC Code Of Practise under section "5.1 The Notice to the Keeper must;".

So I guess the next stage is to go the IAS?

Why would you want to go to the IAS? That's madness. Have you read the thread at the top of this board that tells Newbies to read it first? It would seem not by your questions.

The_Deep

Not that old chestnut, will they never learn.

Elliot v Loake was a criminal case which rested on forensic evidence, (flakes of paint). It has nothing to do with a money claim. They know this and are trying to bamboozle you. Read these.

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/01/skipton-judge-rubbishes-elliot-v-loake.html

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/bw-legal-try-elliott-v-loake-and-cps-v.html

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/bw-legal-try-elliott-v-loake-and-cps-v.html

https://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/06/bw-legal-try-elliott-v-loake-and-cps-v.html

Complain to your MP as nine times out of ten these tickets are scams. This one undoubtedly is..

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies. .

snappyandrew

so just to clarify, after rereading the newbies section, I am not going to IAS and I'm just going to ignore them. I am expecting debt letters which I will also ignore until I get a claim letter.
Sound about right?

Quentin

Yes. .

snappyandrew

One more fly in the ointment.
My wife is the owner of the vehicle and works in a job where she won't be able to take the time off if and when it goes to small claims. I have read that she must be there in the small claims court.
I work for myself and can go to court but am not the owner.
Does this alter my options?